
Exercises #4 – Equalitarian Theories
These were pulled from Exercises for [latex]\S5[/latex] of Chapter I in Bourbaki’s set theory book. (Assume [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] has no constants, i.e. no letters in explicit axioms; thus we can abuse I.2.3.C3 without repercussions) Exercise 1.Solution.Exercise 1. Show the relation [latex]x=y[/latex] is functional in [latex]x[/latex] in [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex]. Solution. Denote the relation [latex]x=y[/latex] by [latex]R[/latex]. Let [latex]a[/latex] and… 
Exercises #3 – Quantified Theories
These were pulled from Exercises for [latex]\S[/latex]3 and Exercises for [latex]\S[/latex]4 of Chapter I in Bourbaki's set theory book. Exercise 1.Solution.Exercise 1. Let [latex]A[/latex] be a relation in logical theory [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex]. If [latex]A\iff (\mbox{not } A)[/latex] is a theorem in [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex], show that [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] is contradictory. Solution. The negation of [latex]A\iff (\mbox{not } A)[/latex] is… 
Exercises #2 – Independence of Axioms
These were pulled from Exercises for [latex]\S[/latex]2 of Chapter I in Bourbaki's set theory book. Exercise 1.Solution for a.Solution for b.Exercise 1. Let [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] be a theory, let [latex]A_1,A_2,...,A_n[/latex] be its explicit axioms and [latex]a_1,a_2,...,a_h[/latex] its constants. Let [latex]\mathfrak{T}'[/latex] be the theory with signs and schemes are the same as those of [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex], and whose… 
Exercises #1 – Signs and Assemblies
These were pulled from Exercises for [latex]\S[/latex]1 of Chapter I of Bourbaki's set theory book. Exercise 1.Solution.Exercise 1. Let [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] be a theory with no specific signs. Show that no assembly in [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] is a relation and that the only assemblies in [latex]\mathfrak{T}[/latex] which are terms are assemblies consisting of single letters. Solution. Let [latex]A[/latex]…
Loading posts...