DOCSLIB.ORG

Towards a Denotational Semantics for Discrete-Event Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Towards a Denotational Semantics for Discrete-Event Systems Towards a Denotational Semantics for Discrete-Event Systems Eleftherios Matsikoudis University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA ematsi@eecs. berkeley.edu Abstract For any two well ordered sets, either they are order- isomorphic or one is order-isomorphic to an initial segment This work focuses on establishing a semantic interpreta- of the other. tion for discrete-event systems. In this paper we describe A set A is called transitive iff a ∈ b ∈ A implies a ∈ A some of the basic mathematical structures, building on the for all sets a, b. tagged-signal model of [4, 3], and the term-based formal- An ordinal is a transitive set that is well ordered by set ism of [5]. containment ∈. We denote the class of all ordinals by Ω. Every well ordered set is order-isomorphic to a unique ordinal, called the ordinal number of the set. Two well or- 1. Prerequisites dered sets are order-isomorphic iff they have the same ordi- nal number. For any set A, the set A ∪ {A} is called the successor of In this section we introduce some terminology and re- A and is denoted by A+. view some fundamental concepts and results from set the- For all ordinals α and β, either α ∈ β, or α = β, or ory and order theory [2, 1]. β ∈ α. Any transitive set of ordinals is an ordinal. The empty 1.1. Isomorphisms set ∅ is an ordinal. If α is an ordinal, then α+ is an ordinal. If A is a set of ordinals, then S A is an ordinal. + Let (P, ≤P ), (Q, ≤Q), (R, ≤R) be ordered sets. For all ordinals α and β, α ∈ β if and only if α ∈ β or A map ϕ : P → Q is an order-embedding, and we write α+ = β. + ϕ : P,→ Q, iff for all p1, p2 ∈ P : An ordinal α is a successor ordinal iff α = β for some ordinal β. Otherwise α = S α, and either α = ∅ or α is a p1 ≤P p2 ⇔ ϕ(p1) ≤Q ϕ(p2) limit ordinal. The class of all ordinals Ω is not a set (Burtali-Forti para- An order-embedding ϕ : P,→ Q is an order- dox). isomorphism iff it maps P onto Q. The ordered sets P and A set A is dominated by a set B iff there exists a one-to- ∼ Q are order-isomorphic, and we write P = Q, iff there ex- one function from A into B. ists an order-isomorphism from P to Q. For any set A, there exists an ordinal α not dominated by The concept of isomorphism obeys laws of reflexivity, A (Hartogs’ theorem). ∼ ∼ symmetry, and transitivity. In particular, P = P , P = Q Note that we adopt von Neumann’s approach to the con- ∼ ∼ ∼ ∼ implies Q = P , and P = Q = R implies P = R. struction of the natural numbers. Under this approach, each natural number is the set of all smaller natural numbers. 1.2. Well Orderings and Ordinals Hence, every natural number is a finite ordinal and the set of all natural numbers ω = {0, 1, 2,...} coincides with the Let (P, ≤) be an ordered set. least limit ordinal. The ordered set (P, ≤) is well ordered iff it is totally or- dered and every non-empty subset of P has a least element. 1.3. Complete Partial Orders If p ∈ P , then the set p0 | p0 < p is called the initial segment up to p and is denoted by seg p. Let (P, ≤) be a partially ordered set. 1 An element ⊥ ∈ P such that ⊥ ≤ p for any p ∈ P is Definition 2.2 (Signal). A signal s is a partial function from called a bottom or zero element. A partially ordered set is the set of tags T to the set of values V, that is s ∈ (T * V). pointed iff it has a bottom element. A subset D of P is directed iff it is non-empty and every Alternatively, a signal s can be defined as a subset of pair of elements in D has an upper bound in D. E, such that for all events (τ1, v1), (τ2, v2) ∈ s, v1 6= v2 τ 6= τ A pointed partially ordered set in which every directed implies 1 2. The two definitions are equivalent and will subset has a least upper bound is called a complete partial be used interchangeably according to context. We denote S S = (T * V) ⊂ E order or simply cpo. the set of all signals by , that is P . The tag-set T (s) of a signal s ∈ S is defined to be the A subset C of P is consistent iff it is non-empty and domain of s, that is T (s) = dom s. every finite subset of C has an upper bound in P . For notational convenience, we will write s (τ) ' s (τ) A cpo (P, ≤) is consistently complete iff every consistent 1 2 iff the signals s and s are either both defined, or both set C ⊆ P has a least upper bound in P . 1 2 undefined at tag τ, and if defined s (τ) = s (τ). An element p of a cpo (P, ≤) is finite iff whenever p ≤ 1 2 W D for a directed set D ⊆ P , p ≤ d for some d ∈ D. Definition 2.3 (Natural Signal). A signal s ∈ S is natural A cpo (P, ≤) is algebraic iff for any p ∈ P , there exists iff there exists an order-embedding from its tag-set T (s) to a directed set D ⊆ P of finite elements such that p = W D. the set of all natural numbers ω. An algebraic cpo is called ω-algebraic iff the set of all finite elements is denumerable. We denote the set of all natural signals by Sω. Definition 2.4 (Ordinal signal). A signal s ∈ S is ordinal 1.4. Least Fixed Points iff its tag-set T (s) is well ordered. Equivalently, a signal is ordinal iff there exists an order- Let (P, ≤P ), (Q, ≤Q) be complete partial orders. A function f : P → Q is order-preserving iff for all isomorphism from its tag-set to some ordinal. A natural sig- nal s ∈ Sω is clearly ordinal, since the existence of an order- p1, p2 ∈ P such that p1 ≤P p2, f(p1) ≤Q f(p2). T (s) A function f : P → Q is continuous iff for every di- embedding from its tag-set to the set of all natural ω rected set D ⊆ P , the set f(d) | d ∈ D is a directed numbers implies the existence of an order-isomorphism from T (s) to some ordinal α, where in particular α ∈ ω or subset of Q, and f(W D) = W f(d) | d ∈ D . Every P Q α = ω. We denote the set of all ordinal signals by S . Note continuous function is order-preserving. Ω that there is no ambiguity in terming the class of all ordinal An element p ∈ P is a fixed point of the function f : signals a set, since S ⊆ S. P → P iff f(p) = p. A fixed point p of f is the least fixed Ω point of f, and we use the expression µx.f(x) to denote it, 2.2. Tuples of Signals iff for any fixed point p0 of f, p ≤ p0. If f : P → P is a continuous function, then f has a least V ar x, y, z, x ,... fixed point and µx.f(x) = W f n(⊥). Let be an infinite set of variables. Let i n∈ω range over V ar and I, J, K, . over V ar. If f : P → P is an order-preserving function, then f P α Given sets I and A, the set of all functions from I to A has a least fixed point and µx.f(x) = f (⊥) for some or- I I + is denoted by (I → A) or A . An element of A can be dinal α, where f β (⊥) = f(f β(⊥)) for any ordinal β, and γ W β thought of as an I-tuple of elements of A, and we usually f (⊥) = f (⊥) | β ∈ γ if γ is a limit ordinal. I I write ai instead of a(i) for a ∈ A , i ∈ I. If a ∈ A and b ∈ AJ with I ∩ J = ∅, then a ⊕ b ∈ AI∪J denotes the 2. Signals and Tuples of Signals (I ∪ J)-tuple satisfying: ( a if i ∈ I, 2.1. Signals (a ⊕ b)(i) = i bi if i ∈ J. Let V be a non-empty set of possible values, and T a A tuple of signals or signal tuple s is an I-tuple of signals non-empty set of tags. While we impose no structure on the in S for some set of variables I ⊆ V ar. Notice that the set of values V, we require that the set of tags be a totally set of all tuples of signals is essentially the set of all partial ordered set (T , ≤). functions from the set of all variables to the set of all signals, Definition 2.1 (Event). An event e is a tuple (τ, v) with τ ∈ that is (V ar * S). I T and v ∈ V. The tag-set T (s) of a tuple s ∈ S is defined as the union of the tag-sets of the tupled signals, that is T (s) = S We denote the set of all events by E, that is E = T × V. i∈I T (si). 2 Occasionally, it will be convenient to consider an alter- The signal-prefix relation v ⊂ S × S is a partial order, native definition for tuples of signals, according to which a and for any signal s ∈ S, ∅ v s.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biography Paper – Georg Cantor
    Mike Garkie Math 4010 – History of Math UCD Denver 4/1/08 Biography Paper – Georg Cantor Few mathematicians are house-hold names; perhaps only Newton and Euclid would qualify. But there is a second tier of mathematicians, those whose names might not be familiar, but whose discoveries are part of everyday math. Examples here are Napier with logarithms, Cauchy with limits and Georg Cantor (1845 – 1918) with sets. In fact, those who superficially familier with Georg Cantor probably have two impressions of the man: First, as a consequence of thinking about sets, Cantor developed a theory of the actual infinite. And second, that Cantor was a troubled genius, crippled by Freudian conflict and mental illness. The first impression is fundamentally true. Cantor almost single-handedly overturned the Aristotle’s concept of the potential infinite by developing the concept of transfinite numbers. And, even though Bolzano and Frege made significant contributions, “Set theory … is the creation of one person, Georg Cantor.” [4] The second impression is mostly false. Cantor certainly did suffer from mental illness later in his life, but the other emotional baggage assigned to him is mostly due his early biographers, particularly the infamous E.T. Bell in Men Of Mathematics [7]. In the racially charged atmosphere of 1930’s Europe, the sensational story mathematician who turned the idea of infinity on its head and went crazy in the process, probably make for good reading. The drama of the controversy over Cantor’s ideas only added spice. 1 Fortunately, modern scholars have corrected the errors and biases in older biographies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Axiom of Choice and Its Implications
    THE AXIOM OF CHOICE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS KEVIN BARNUM Abstract. In this paper we will look at the Axiom of Choice and some of the various implications it has. These implications include a number of equivalent statements, and also some less accepted ideas. The proofs discussed will give us an idea of why the Axiom of Choice is so powerful, but also so controversial. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. The Axiom of Choice and Its Equivalents 1 2.1. The Axiom of Choice and its Well-known Equivalents 1 2.2. Some Other Less Well-known Equivalents of the Axiom of Choice 3 3. Applications of the Axiom of Choice 5 3.1. Equivalence Between The Axiom of Choice and the Claim that Every Vector Space has a Basis 5 3.2. Some More Applications of the Axiom of Choice 6 4. Controversial Results 10 Acknowledgments 11 References 11 1. Introduction The Axiom of Choice states that for any family of nonempty disjoint sets, there exists a set that consists of exactly one element from each element of the family. It seems strange at first that such an innocuous sounding idea can be so powerful and controversial, but it certainly is both. To understand why, we will start by looking at some statements that are equivalent to the axiom of choice. Many of these equivalences are very useful, and we devote much time to one, namely, that every vector space has a basis. We go on from there to see a few more applications of the Axiom of Choice and its equivalents, and finish by looking at some of the reasons why the Axiom of Choice is so controversial.
    [Show full text]
  • Elements of Set Theory
    Elements of set theory April 1, 2014 ii Contents 1 Zermelo{Fraenkel axiomatization 1 1.1 Historical context . 1 1.2 The language of the theory . 3 1.3 The most basic axioms . 4 1.4 Axiom of Infinity . 4 1.5 Axiom schema of Comprehension . 5 1.6 Functions . 6 1.7 Axiom of Choice . 7 1.8 Axiom schema of Replacement . 9 1.9 Axiom of Regularity . 9 2 Basic notions 11 2.1 Transitive sets . 11 2.2 Von Neumann's natural numbers . 11 2.3 Finite and infinite sets . 15 2.4 Cardinality . 17 2.5 Countable and uncountable sets . 19 3 Ordinals 21 3.1 Basic definitions . 21 3.2 Transfinite induction and recursion . 25 3.3 Applications with choice . 26 3.4 Applications without choice . 29 3.5 Cardinal numbers . 31 4 Descriptive set theory 35 4.1 Rational and real numbers . 35 4.2 Topological spaces . 37 4.3 Polish spaces . 39 4.4 Borel sets . 43 4.5 Analytic sets . 46 4.6 Lebesgue's mistake . 48 iii iv CONTENTS 5 Formal logic 51 5.1 Propositional logic . 51 5.1.1 Propositional logic: syntax . 51 5.1.2 Propositional logic: semantics . 52 5.1.3 Propositional logic: completeness . 53 5.2 First order logic . 56 5.2.1 First order logic: syntax . 56 5.2.2 First order logic: semantics . 59 5.2.3 Completeness theorem . 60 6 Model theory 67 6.1 Basic notions . 67 6.2 Ultraproducts and nonstandard analysis . 68 6.3 Quantifier elimination and the real closed fields .
    [Show full text]
  • CLASS II MATHEMATICS CHAPTER-2: ORDINAL NUMBERS Cardinal Numbers - the Numbers One, Two, Three
    CLASS II MATHEMATICS CHAPTER-2: ORDINAL NUMBERS Cardinal Numbers - The numbers one, two, three,..... which tell us the number of objects or items are called Cardinal Numbers. Ordinal Numbers - The numbers such as first, second, third ...... which tell us the position of an object in a collection are called Ordinal Numbers. CARDINAL NUMBERS READ THE CONVERSATION That was great Ria… I stood first Hi Mic! How in my class. was your result? In the conversation the word ’first’ is an ordinal number. LOOK AT THE PICTURE CAREFULLY FIRST THIRD FIFTH SECOND FOURTH ORDINAL NUMBERS Cardinal Numbers Ordinal Numbers 1 1st / first 2 2nd / second 3 3rd / third 4 4th / fourth 5 5th / fifth 6 6th / sixth 7 7th / seventh 8 8th / eighth 9 9th / ninth 10 10th / tenth Cardinal Numbers Ordinal Numbers 11 11th / eleventh 12 12th / twelfth 13 13th / thirteenth 14 14th / fourteenth 15 15th / fifteenth 16 16th / sixteenth 17 17th / seventeenth 18 18th / eighteenth 19 19th / nineteenth 20 20th / twentieth Q1. Observe the given sequence of pictures and fill in the blanks with correct ordinal numbers. 1. Circle is at __ place. 2. Bat and ball is at __ place. 3. Cross is at __ place. 4. Kite is at __ place. 5. Flower is at __ place. 6. Flag is at __ place. HOME ASSIGNMENT 1. MATCH THE CORRECT PAIRS OF ORDINAL NUMBERS: 1. seventh 4th 2. fourth 7th 3. ninth 20th 4. twentieth 9th 5. tenth 6th 6. sixth 10th 7. twelfth 13th 8. fourteenth 12th 9. thirteenth 14th Let’s Solve 2. FILL IN THE BLANKS WITH CORRECT ORDINAL NUMBER 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Set Theory We Should Know Cardinality and Cardinal Numbers
    SOME SET THEORY WE SHOULD KNOW CARDINALITY AND CARDINAL NUMBERS De¯nition. Two sets A and B are said to have the same cardinality, and we write jAj = jBj, if there exists a one-to-one onto function f : A ! B. We also say jAj · jBj if there exists a one-to-one (but not necessarily onto) function f : A ! B. Then the SchrÄoder-BernsteinTheorem says: jAj · jBj and jBj · jAj implies jAj = jBj: SchrÄoder-BernsteinTheorem. If there are one-to-one maps f : A ! B and g : B ! A, then jAj = jBj. A set is called countable if it is either ¯nite or has the same cardinality as the set N of positive integers. Theorem ST1. (a) A countable union of countable sets is countable; (b) If A1;A2; :::; An are countable, so is ¦i·nAi; (c) If A is countable, so is the set of all ¯nite subsets of A, as well as the set of all ¯nite sequences of elements of A; (d) The set Q of all rational numbers is countable. Theorem ST2. The following sets have the same cardinality as the set R of real numbers: (a) The set P(N) of all subsets of the natural numbers N; (b) The set of all functions f : N ! f0; 1g; (c) The set of all in¯nite sequences of 0's and 1's; (d) The set of all in¯nite sequences of real numbers. The cardinality of N (and any countable in¯nite set) is denoted by @0. @1 denotes the next in¯nite cardinal, @2 the next, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Axioms of Set Theory and Equivalents of Axiom of Choice Farighon Abdul Rahim Boise State University, [email protected]
    Boise State University ScholarWorks Mathematics Undergraduate Theses Department of Mathematics 5-2014 Axioms of Set Theory and Equivalents of Axiom of Choice Farighon Abdul Rahim Boise State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/ math_undergraduate_theses Part of the Set Theory Commons Recommended Citation Rahim, Farighon Abdul, "Axioms of Set Theory and Equivalents of Axiom of Choice" (2014). Mathematics Undergraduate Theses. Paper 1. Axioms of Set Theory and Equivalents of Axiom of Choice Farighon Abdul Rahim Advisor: Samuel Coskey Boise State University May 2014 1 Introduction Sets are all around us. A bag of potato chips, for instance, is a set containing certain number of individual chip’s that are its elements. University is another example of a set with students as its elements. By elements, we mean members. But sets should not be confused as to what they really are. A daughter of a blacksmith is an element of a set that contains her mother, father, and her siblings. Then this set is an element of a set that contains all the other families that live in the nearby town. So a set itself can be an element of a bigger set. In mathematics, axiom is defined to be a rule or a statement that is accepted to be true regardless of having to prove it. In a sense, axioms are self evident. In set theory, we deal with sets. Each time we state an axiom, we will do so by considering sets. Example of the set containing the blacksmith family might make it seem as if sets are finite.
    [Show full text]
  • A Severe Inconsistency of Transfinite Set Theory1
    A severe inconsistency of transfinite set theory1 W. Mückenheim University of Applied Sciences, D-86161 Augsburg, Germany [[email protected]] Transfinite set theory including the axiom of choice supplies the following basic theorems: (1) Mappings between infinite sets can always be completed, such that at least one of the sets is exhausted. (2) The real numbers can be well ordered. (3) The relative positions of real numbers which are enumerated by natural numbers can always be determined, in particular the maximum real number below a given limit. (4) Any two different real numbers are separated by at least one rational number. These theorems are applied to map the irrational numbers into the rational numbers, showing that the set of all irrational numbers is countable. 1. Introduction Georg Cantor is that mathematician whose name is most closely connected with the notion of infinity. An essential point of his theory is the basic law (Denkgesetz) that the continuum can be well-ordered. Precisely 100 years ago, here in Heidelberg, Cantor had to suffer a serious attack from König2 who claimed to have contradicted this. In fact nobody has ever accomplished it. But Zermelo's axiom of choice, created immediately after that dispute, convinced more and more mathematicians that well-ordering could be proved. This is a singular case in history of mathematics. Instead of refuting König's claim by a counter example, an axiom was created which supplies rather an encoded proclamation of the desired result than proof3. The axiom of choice allows us to manipulate all the elements of an infinite set simultaneously instead of considering one after the other4.
    [Show full text]
  • An Axiomatic Approach to the Ordinal Number System
    An axiomatic approach to the ordinal number system Ineke van der Berg Thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Mathematics) in the Faculty of Science at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Professor Z. Janelidze 2021 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Declaration By submitting this thesis electronically, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Date: 6th March 2021 Copyright c 2021 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved. i Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Zurab Janelidze, not only for his guidance and contributions to the thesis, but also for nurturing my confidence and enthusiasm throughout my studies. I could not imagine a better guide through the magical realm of mathematics. I also wish to thank my friend, Dr Katrina du Toit, for her skilful proofreading, usually on short notice. I value your appreciation for brevity and precision, and your feedback is exactly the right level of pedantic. I promise to use more commas in the future. Thanks, also, to my other friends, particularly Roy, Alan, and Dale, for their com- ments on topology, typography, and layout, respectively. Iggy, thank you for being supportive, for motivating me, and for always being available for conversation, whether academic or otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Addition of Ordinals
    FORMALIZED MATHEMATICS Vol. 27, No. 2, Pages 139–152, 2019 DOI: 10.2478/forma-2019-0015 https://www.sciendo.com/ Natural Addition of Ordinals Sebastian Koch Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Germany1 Summary. In [3] the existence of the Cantor normal form of ordinals was proven in the Mizar system [6]. In this article its uniqueness is proven and then used to formalize the natural sum of ordinals. MSC: 03E10 68T99 03B35 Keywords: ordinal numbers; Cantor normal form; Hessenberg sum; natural sum MML identifier: ORDINAL7, version: 8.1.09 5.57.1355 0. Introduction It is well known that any ordinal number α can be uniquely written as k X βi α = niω , i=1 where k is a natural number, n1, . , nk are positive integers and β1 > . > βk are ordinal numbers. This representation, usually called the Cantor Normal β1 β Form, has been formalized as the tuple hn1ω , . , nkω k i in [3] and the exi- stence of such a sequence that sums up to a given ordinal α has been proven in the same, but the uniqueness was omitted. The basic proof idea for the uniqueness is well known (cf. [1], [2], [4], [5], [8]). This article provides a variant which utilizes the additional closure of ordinals, i.e. that any ordinals α, β, γ with α, β ∈ ωγ also satisfy α + β ∈ ωγ. Usually the 1The author is enrolled in the Johannes Gutenberg University in Mayence, Germany, mailto: [email protected] c 2019 University of Białystok CC-BY-SA License ver. 3.0 or later 139 ISSN 1426–2630(Print), 1898-9934(Online) 140 sebastian koch additional closure is proven using the uniqueness in the literature, but here the additional closure is proven first by using theorems from [3].
    [Show full text]
  • SET THEORY for CATEGORY THEORY 3 the Category Is Well-Powered, Meaning That Each Object Has Only a Set of Iso- Morphism Classes of Subobjects
    SET THEORY FOR CATEGORY THEORY MICHAEL A. SHULMAN Abstract. Questions of set-theoretic size play an essential role in category theory, especially the distinction between sets and proper classes (or small sets and large sets). There are many different ways to formalize this, and which choice is made can have noticeable effects on what categorical constructions are permissible. In this expository paper we summarize and compare a num- ber of such “set-theoretic foundations for category theory,” and describe their implications for the everyday use of category theory. We assume the reader has some basic knowledge of category theory, but little or no prior experience with formal logic or set theory. 1. Introduction Since its earliest days, category theory has had to deal with set-theoretic ques- tions. This is because unlike in most fields of mathematics outside of set theory, questions of size play an essential role in category theory. A good example is Freyd’s Special Adjoint Functor Theorem: a functor from a complete, locally small, and well-powered category with a cogenerating set to a locally small category has a left adjoint if and only if it preserves small limits. This is always one of the first results I quote when people ask me “are there any real theorems in category theory?” So it is all the more striking that it involves in an essential way notions like ‘locally small’, ‘small limits’, and ‘cogenerating set’ which refer explicitly to the difference between sets and proper classes (or between small sets and large sets). Despite this, in my experience there is a certain amount of confusion among users and students of category theory about its foundations, and in particular about what constructions on large categories are or are not possible.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Set Theory
    AN INTRODUCTION TO SET THEORY Professor William A. R. Weiss November 21, 2014 2 Contents 0 Introduction 7 1 LOST 11 2 FOUND 23 3 The Axioms of Set Theory 29 4 The Natural Numbers 37 5 The Ordinal Numbers 47 6 Relations and Orderings 59 7 Cardinality 69 8 What's So Real About The Real Numbers? 79 9 Ultrafilters Are Useful 87 3 4 CONTENTS 10 The Universe 97 11 Reflection 103 12 Elementary Submodels 123 13 Constructibility 139 14 Appendices 155 .1 The Axioms of ZFC . 155 .2 Tentative Axioms . 156 CONTENTS 5 Preface These notes for a graduate course in set theory are on their way to be- coming a book. They originated as handwritten notes in a course at the University of Toronto given by Prof. William Weiss. Cynthia Church pro- duced the first electronic copy in December 2002. James Talmage Adams produced a major revision in February 2005. The manuscript has seen many changes since then, often due to generous comments by students, each of whom I here thank. Chapters 1 to 11 are now close to final form. Chapters 12 and 13 are quite readable, but should not be considered as a final draft. One more chapter will be added. 6 CONTENTS Chapter 0 Introduction Set Theory is the true study of infinity. This alone assures the subject of a place prominent in human culture. But even more, Set Theory is the milieu in which mathematics takes place today. As such, it is expected to provide a firm foundation for all the rest of mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Axiom of Determinacy
    Virginia Commonwealth University VCU Scholars Compass Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2010 The Axiom of Determinacy Samantha Stanton Virginia Commonwealth University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons © The Author Downloaded from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/etd/2189 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at VCU Scholars Compass. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of VCU Scholars Compass. For more information, please contact [email protected]. College of Humanities and Sciences Virginia Commonwealth University This is to certify that the thesis prepared by Samantha Stanton titled “The Axiom of Determinacy” has been approved by his or her committee as satisfactory completion of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Science. Dr. Andrew Lewis, College of Humanities and Sciences Dr. Lon Mitchell, College of Humanities and Sciences Dr. Robert Gowdy, College of Humanities and Sciences Dr. John Berglund, Graduate Chair, Mathematics and Applied Mathematics Dr. Robert Holsworth, Dean, College of Humanities and Sciences Dr. F. Douglas Boudinot, Graduate Dean Date © Samantha Stanton 2010 All Rights Reserved The Axiom of Determinacy A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science at Virginia Commonwealth University. by Samantha Stanton Master of Science Director: Dr. Andrew Lewis, Associate Professor, Department Chair Department of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics Virginia Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia May 2010 ii Acknowledgment I am most appreciative of Dr. Andrew Lewis. I would like to thank him for his support, patience, and understanding through this entire process.
    [Show full text]