proof that weak axiom of pairing and axiom schema of specification imply axiom of pairing












0












$begingroup$


as the title says I am trying to give a (nearly, but not fully formal) proof that the weak axiom of pairing (i.e. $forall x forall y exists p: x in p wedge y in p$) together with a suitable instance of the axiom schema of specification does imply the axiom of pairing.
I haven't found a suitable instance yet, so this would be the first step to take.






elementary-set-theory logic proof-writing axioms







share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    0












    $begingroup$


    as the title says I am trying to give a (nearly, but not fully formal) proof that the weak axiom of pairing (i.e. $forall x forall y exists p: x in p wedge y in p$) together with a suitable instance of the axiom schema of specification does imply the axiom of pairing.
    I haven't found a suitable instance yet, so this would be the first step to take.






    elementary-set-theory logic proof-writing axioms







    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      0












      0








      0


      1



      $begingroup$


      as the title says I am trying to give a (nearly, but not fully formal) proof that the weak axiom of pairing (i.e. $forall x forall y exists p: x in p wedge y in p$) together with a suitable instance of the axiom schema of specification does imply the axiom of pairing.
      I haven't found a suitable instance yet, so this would be the first step to take.






      elementary-set-theory logic proof-writing axioms







      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      as the title says I am trying to give a (nearly, but not fully formal) proof that the weak axiom of pairing (i.e. $forall x forall y exists p: x in p wedge y in p$) together with a suitable instance of the axiom schema of specification does imply the axiom of pairing.
      I haven't found a suitable instance yet, so this would be the first step to take.






      elementary-set-theory logic proof-writing axioms




      elementary-set-theory logic proof-writing axioms






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Jan 12 at 21:16









      Andrés E. Caicedo

      65.2k8158247




      65.2k8158247










      asked Jan 12 at 17:34









      StudentuStudentu

      1228




      1228






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a 'nearly, but not fully, formal proof' (OK, it is fully formal, but it is not fully completed):



          enter image description here






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            What software is that?
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Jan 12 at 18:46






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 12 at 19:14










          • $begingroup$
            This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:10






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 13 at 18:21








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 15 at 1:31



















          1












          $begingroup$

          Given $x,y$, let $p$ be such that $xin pland yin p$. Then ${x,y}={,tin pmid t=xlor t=y,}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09



















          1












          $begingroup$

          Fix $x,y$ and take $p$ such that $x, y in p$. Now take the formula $Phi = ( z = x lor z = y)$ and apply the axiom of specification on $p$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answering!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071156%2fproof-that-weak-axiom-of-pairing-and-axiom-schema-of-specification-imply-axiom-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes








          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a 'nearly, but not fully, formal proof' (OK, it is fully formal, but it is not fully completed):



          enter image description here






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            What software is that?
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Jan 12 at 18:46






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 12 at 19:14










          • $begingroup$
            This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:10






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 13 at 18:21








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 15 at 1:31
















          2












          $begingroup$

          Here is a 'nearly, but not fully, formal proof' (OK, it is fully formal, but it is not fully completed):



          enter image description here






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$









          • 1




            $begingroup$
            What software is that?
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Jan 12 at 18:46






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 12 at 19:14










          • $begingroup$
            This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:10






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 13 at 18:21








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 15 at 1:31














          2












          2








          2





          $begingroup$

          Here is a 'nearly, but not fully, formal proof' (OK, it is fully formal, but it is not fully completed):



          enter image description here






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Here is a 'nearly, but not fully, formal proof' (OK, it is fully formal, but it is not fully completed):



          enter image description here







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jan 12 at 19:18

























          answered Jan 12 at 18:42









          Bram28Bram28

          61.4k44792




          61.4k44792








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            What software is that?
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Jan 12 at 18:46






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 12 at 19:14










          • $begingroup$
            This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:10






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 13 at 18:21








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 15 at 1:31














          • 1




            $begingroup$
            What software is that?
            $endgroup$
            – J.G.
            Jan 12 at 18:46






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 12 at 19:14










          • $begingroup$
            This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:10






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 13 at 18:21








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
            $endgroup$
            – Bram28
            Jan 15 at 1:31








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          What software is that?
          $endgroup$
          – J.G.
          Jan 12 at 18:46




          $begingroup$
          What software is that?
          $endgroup$
          – J.G.
          Jan 12 at 18:46




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 12 at 19:14




          $begingroup$
          @J.G. It's called 'Fitch' .. it comes with the book "Language, Proof, and Logic"
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 12 at 19:14












          $begingroup$
          This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:10




          $begingroup$
          This software seems awesome! (Though I don't fully understand the notions there.) Thank you for your reply!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:10




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 13 at 18:21






          $begingroup$
          @Studentu The 'Fitch' system is actually a fairly well known and well-used system for creating fully formal proofs. Here is a list with all the rules: math.mcgill.ca/rags/JAC/124/Rules-Strategy-b.pdf
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 13 at 18:21






          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 15 at 1:31




          $begingroup$
          @Studentu Cool. You're welcome! :)
          $endgroup$
          – Bram28
          Jan 15 at 1:31











          1












          $begingroup$

          Given $x,y$, let $p$ be such that $xin pland yin p$. Then ${x,y}={,tin pmid t=xlor t=y,}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09
















          1












          $begingroup$

          Given $x,y$, let $p$ be such that $xin pland yin p$. Then ${x,y}={,tin pmid t=xlor t=y,}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          Given $x,y$, let $p$ be such that $xin pland yin p$. Then ${x,y}={,tin pmid t=xlor t=y,}$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Given $x,y$, let $p$ be such that $xin pland yin p$. Then ${x,y}={,tin pmid t=xlor t=y,}$.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Jan 12 at 17:37









          Hagen von EitzenHagen von Eitzen

          278k22269498




          278k22269498












          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09


















          • $begingroup$
            Thanks for your answer!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09
















          $begingroup$
          Thanks for your answer!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:09




          $begingroup$
          Thanks for your answer!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:09











          1












          $begingroup$

          Fix $x,y$ and take $p$ such that $x, y in p$. Now take the formula $Phi = ( z = x lor z = y)$ and apply the axiom of specification on $p$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answering!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09
















          1












          $begingroup$

          Fix $x,y$ and take $p$ such that $x, y in p$. Now take the formula $Phi = ( z = x lor z = y)$ and apply the axiom of specification on $p$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answering!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09














          1












          1








          1





          $begingroup$

          Fix $x,y$ and take $p$ such that $x, y in p$. Now take the formula $Phi = ( z = x lor z = y)$ and apply the axiom of specification on $p$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Fix $x,y$ and take $p$ such that $x, y in p$. Now take the formula $Phi = ( z = x lor z = y)$ and apply the axiom of specification on $p$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jan 12 at 20:46

























          answered Jan 12 at 17:40









          Lucas HenriqueLucas Henrique

          1,032414




          1,032414












          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answering!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09


















          • $begingroup$
            Thank you for answering!
            $endgroup$
            – Studentu
            Jan 13 at 18:09
















          $begingroup$
          Thank you for answering!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:09




          $begingroup$
          Thank you for answering!
          $endgroup$
          – Studentu
          Jan 13 at 18:09


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3071156%2fproof-that-weak-axiom-of-pairing-and-axiom-schema-of-specification-imply-axiom-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          Mario Kart Wii

          Image
          Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! Mario Kart Wii From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search Mario Kart Wii Developer : Nintendo Publisher : Nintendo Platform : Wii Released in JP : April 10, 2008 Released in US : April 27, 2008 Released in EU : April 11, 2008 Released in AU : April 24, 2008 Released in KR : April 30, 2009 This game has unused animations. This game has unused areas. This game has unused code. This game has unused objects. This game has unused modes / minigames. This game has unused graphics. This game has unused models. This game has unused items. This game has unused music. This game has regional differences. This game has a notes page This game has a prerelease article Mario Kart Wii is the sixth game in the series (not counting Arcade editions), which intro
          Read more

          What does “Dominus providebit” mean?

          Image
          5 Does "Dominus providebit" mean "The Lord will provide" or "The Lord provides"? I once had a bit of an argument with a guy who studied Latin over that. It's an inscription that appears on the rim of some old Swiss coins that I have. meaning latin-to-english-translation grammar-identification share | improve this question edited Jan 18 at 15:27 V2Blast 105 4 asked Jan 17 at 22:49 Donald K. Donald K. 26 1
          Read more

          File:Tiny Toon Adventures Wacky Sports JP Title.png

          Image
          Please consider supporting The Cutting Room Floor on Patreon. Thanks for all your support! File:Tiny Toon Adventures Wacky Sports JP Title.png From The Cutting Room Floor Jump to: navigation, search File File history File usage No higher resolution available. Tiny_Toon_Adventures_Wacky_Sports_JP_Title.png ‎ (160 × 144 pixels, file size: 3 KB, MIME type: image/png ) This image is a screenshot of a(n) Game Boy title screen. File history Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time. Date/Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 21:31, 20 August 2016 160 × 144 (3 KB) TheBluegeek (Talk | contribs) 17:25, 29 August 2013 160 × 144 (3 KB) Luigi-San (Talk | contribs) {{titlescreen|Game Boy}} You cannot overwrite this file. File usage The following page links to this file: Tiny Toon Advent
          Read more