|
| ,
which
is
the
logic
|
|
 |
|
 |
, which is the logical cnruodnum we find ourselves in when sets can contain themselves as elements. As for the infinite loop, I'm not so sure I see what you're saying. After all, it's the set of all sets, so it will also contain all sets that contain themselves as elements, as well as all sets that contain the set of all sets. But still, as it stands, there's nothing really wrong with this. It's obviously a wildly infinite set, and it is contained in many of the sets that form its elements, but it's the set of all sets , so it's bound to be pretty gigantic and weird. Of course, this is tough to really give a solid answer to, because the whole point of the set of all sets is to be ill-defined. That said, I don't think the illness of its definition comes from this type of infinite loop, but rather from other closely related issues (again, explored in lessons 4 and 5).And as for the second part of your comment: thanks! I'm glad you're finding it helpful and interesting, and I do hope to be getting some more content up very soon. I hope you keep reading!Cheers
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(VISITOR) AUTHOR'S NAME
Amar
MESSAGE TIMESTAMP
18 december 2014, 02:38:58
AUTHOR'S IP LOGGED
62.210.78.179
|
|
|
|
