3.4 KLs and logicIn building the theory of sets from the
intuitive concepts of membership and collection, we arrive to
paradoxes coming from the use of self-membership (or
self-reference). One of them is the famous Russell paradox. The Russell
set is defined to be the set of all sets that are not members of themselves.
X is a member of X exactly when X is not a member of X (Kauffman, 1994).
Using the language of mathematical logic, this means that
A similar paradox based on a self-reference is the sentence:
"This statement is false", that implies the logical equation
Whitehead and Russell (1927) posed the problem in terms of self-membership (or self-reference), and solved those paradoxes by prohibiting mixing different levels of discourse. In Gödel-Bernays set theory these paradoxes are solved by making a distinction between set and class, i.e., by introducing a hierarchy of levels. A class is a set if it is a member of another class. In this system the Russell class is R={X|X Ï X and X is a set}, so R is a class, but not a set. That concept accepts self-membership, or self-reference. Namely, a self-reference can be used as a tool for a construction of interesting ascending chains of membership. Let us denote the empty set by a line segment -. A finite expression E in line segments is well-formed if:
A finite ordered multi-set S is an
expression in the form S= Two finite ordered multi-sets are equal iff they have the same members in the same order, i.e., iff their 0-1 encodings are identical. An isomorphic visual interpretation of S can be obtained by taking rectangles instead of line segments. Ordered finite multi-sets are isomorphic to the class of rooted planar tries, by graphical dualities illustrated in the next figure. A depth of a level to which a member belongs, directly visible from S, can be obtained by counting nodes from the root of tree.
|