Amorphous proper classes in MKWhat sort of structure can amorphous sets support?Splitting infinite setsFor models of ZF, if for some $A$ we have $L[A] = L$, what can we deduce about $A$?What sort of structure can amorphous sets support?Some questions about Ackermann set theoryHartogs number and the three power setsCan $mathbbR$ be partitioned into dedekind-finite sets?How many Dedekind-finite sets can $mathbbR$ be partitioned into?Can ZFC be interpreted in a set theory having finitely many ranks?An axiom for collecting proper classesDo choice principles in all generic extensions imply AC in $V$?

Amorphous proper classes in MK


What sort of structure can amorphous sets support?Splitting infinite setsFor models of ZF, if for some $A$ we have $L[A] = L$, what can we deduce about $A$?What sort of structure can amorphous sets support?Some questions about Ackermann set theoryHartogs number and the three power setsCan $mathbbR$ be partitioned into dedekind-finite sets?How many Dedekind-finite sets can $mathbbR$ be partitioned into?Can ZFC be interpreted in a set theory having finitely many ranks?An axiom for collecting proper classesDo choice principles in all generic extensions imply AC in $V$?













4












$begingroup$


Working in $ZFC$ every cardinal is either finite or in bijection with a proper subset of itself (Dedekind infinite). Without Choice it is consistent that there are infinite sets which can't be partitioned into two infinite subsets (amorphous sets), so the above statement no longer holds since a bijection to a proper subset implies a partition into two disjoint infinite subsets as proven on the wiki -- all of this is discussed in the question and answers here much more succinctly.




Is it consistent in $MK$ without Global Choice that there are amorphous proper classes, meaning proper classes which can't be partitioned into two proper class sized subclasses?




Directly generalizing the argument given on the wiki article for amorphous sets seems to require a notion of transfinite function composition which can be defined in good categorical generality using colimits, but it is not immediately apparent how to generalize the recursive definition of the $S_i$'s for limit ordinal $i$ since the given definitions depend on immediate predecessor steps.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    4












    $begingroup$


    Working in $ZFC$ every cardinal is either finite or in bijection with a proper subset of itself (Dedekind infinite). Without Choice it is consistent that there are infinite sets which can't be partitioned into two infinite subsets (amorphous sets), so the above statement no longer holds since a bijection to a proper subset implies a partition into two disjoint infinite subsets as proven on the wiki -- all of this is discussed in the question and answers here much more succinctly.




    Is it consistent in $MK$ without Global Choice that there are amorphous proper classes, meaning proper classes which can't be partitioned into two proper class sized subclasses?




    Directly generalizing the argument given on the wiki article for amorphous sets seems to require a notion of transfinite function composition which can be defined in good categorical generality using colimits, but it is not immediately apparent how to generalize the recursive definition of the $S_i$'s for limit ordinal $i$ since the given definitions depend on immediate predecessor steps.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      Working in $ZFC$ every cardinal is either finite or in bijection with a proper subset of itself (Dedekind infinite). Without Choice it is consistent that there are infinite sets which can't be partitioned into two infinite subsets (amorphous sets), so the above statement no longer holds since a bijection to a proper subset implies a partition into two disjoint infinite subsets as proven on the wiki -- all of this is discussed in the question and answers here much more succinctly.




      Is it consistent in $MK$ without Global Choice that there are amorphous proper classes, meaning proper classes which can't be partitioned into two proper class sized subclasses?




      Directly generalizing the argument given on the wiki article for amorphous sets seems to require a notion of transfinite function composition which can be defined in good categorical generality using colimits, but it is not immediately apparent how to generalize the recursive definition of the $S_i$'s for limit ordinal $i$ since the given definitions depend on immediate predecessor steps.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Working in $ZFC$ every cardinal is either finite or in bijection with a proper subset of itself (Dedekind infinite). Without Choice it is consistent that there are infinite sets which can't be partitioned into two infinite subsets (amorphous sets), so the above statement no longer holds since a bijection to a proper subset implies a partition into two disjoint infinite subsets as proven on the wiki -- all of this is discussed in the question and answers here much more succinctly.




      Is it consistent in $MK$ without Global Choice that there are amorphous proper classes, meaning proper classes which can't be partitioned into two proper class sized subclasses?




      Directly generalizing the argument given on the wiki article for amorphous sets seems to require a notion of transfinite function composition which can be defined in good categorical generality using colimits, but it is not immediately apparent how to generalize the recursive definition of the $S_i$'s for limit ordinal $i$ since the given definitions depend on immediate predecessor steps.







      set-theory lo.logic axiom-of-choice






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 1 hour ago









      David Roberts

      17.5k463177




      17.5k463177










      asked 4 hours ago









      Alec RheaAlec Rhea

      1,3331819




      1,3331819




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          Unless I'm missing something, the answer is no: we have a surjection $s$ from a given proper class to the class of ordinals - sending each element to its rank and then "collapsing" appropriately - and this lets us partition the original class into two proper classes, for example $s^-1(limits)$ versus $s^-1(successors)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 4




            $begingroup$
            @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
            $endgroup$
            – David Roberts
            1 hour ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
            $endgroup$
            – Alec Rhea
            39 mins ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I guess I am uncool as well...
            $endgroup$
            – Andrés E. Caicedo
            35 mins ago










          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: "504"
          ;
          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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f325796%2famorphous-proper-classes-in-mk%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          5












          $begingroup$

          Unless I'm missing something, the answer is no: we have a surjection $s$ from a given proper class to the class of ordinals - sending each element to its rank and then "collapsing" appropriately - and this lets us partition the original class into two proper classes, for example $s^-1(limits)$ versus $s^-1(successors)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 4




            $begingroup$
            @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
            $endgroup$
            – David Roberts
            1 hour ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
            $endgroup$
            – Alec Rhea
            39 mins ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I guess I am uncool as well...
            $endgroup$
            – Andrés E. Caicedo
            35 mins ago















          5












          $begingroup$

          Unless I'm missing something, the answer is no: we have a surjection $s$ from a given proper class to the class of ordinals - sending each element to its rank and then "collapsing" appropriately - and this lets us partition the original class into two proper classes, for example $s^-1(limits)$ versus $s^-1(successors)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 4




            $begingroup$
            @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
            $endgroup$
            – David Roberts
            1 hour ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
            $endgroup$
            – Alec Rhea
            39 mins ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I guess I am uncool as well...
            $endgroup$
            – Andrés E. Caicedo
            35 mins ago













          5












          5








          5





          $begingroup$

          Unless I'm missing something, the answer is no: we have a surjection $s$ from a given proper class to the class of ordinals - sending each element to its rank and then "collapsing" appropriately - and this lets us partition the original class into two proper classes, for example $s^-1(limits)$ versus $s^-1(successors)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Unless I'm missing something, the answer is no: we have a surjection $s$ from a given proper class to the class of ordinals - sending each element to its rank and then "collapsing" appropriately - and this lets us partition the original class into two proper classes, for example $s^-1(limits)$ versus $s^-1(successors)$.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered 3 hours ago









          Noah SchweberNoah Schweber

          19.5k349146




          19.5k349146







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 4




            $begingroup$
            @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
            $endgroup$
            – David Roberts
            1 hour ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
            $endgroup$
            – Alec Rhea
            39 mins ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I guess I am uncool as well...
            $endgroup$
            – Andrés E. Caicedo
            35 mins ago












          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 1




            $begingroup$
            @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
            $endgroup$
            – Asaf Karagila
            3 hours ago






          • 4




            $begingroup$
            @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
            $endgroup$
            – David Roberts
            1 hour ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
            $endgroup$
            – Alec Rhea
            39 mins ago







          • 2




            $begingroup$
            I guess I am uncool as well...
            $endgroup$
            – Andrés E. Caicedo
            35 mins ago







          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
          $endgroup$
          – Asaf Karagila
          3 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @Alec: In that case the answer is positive. Just do Fraenkel's model over a proper class of atoms.
          $endgroup$
          – Asaf Karagila
          3 hours ago




          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
          $endgroup$
          – Asaf Karagila
          3 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          @Alec: That's the OG model for amorphous sets. Just remember that ZFA (or ZFU) is equivalent to ZF-Foundation with Quine atoms for the atoms.
          $endgroup$
          – Asaf Karagila
          3 hours ago




          4




          4




          $begingroup$
          @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
          $endgroup$
          – David Roberts
          1 hour ago





          $begingroup$
          @Noah Asaf is calling you uncool for not knowing.
          $endgroup$
          – David Roberts
          1 hour ago





          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
          $endgroup$
          – Alec Rhea
          39 mins ago





          $begingroup$
          Hahah, it’s an abbreviation for the american colloquialism “original gangster” meaning a member of the original older generation of badasses in a given gang/discipline of mathematics.
          $endgroup$
          – Alec Rhea
          39 mins ago





          2




          2




          $begingroup$
          I guess I am uncool as well...
          $endgroup$
          – Andrés E. Caicedo
          35 mins ago




          $begingroup$
          I guess I am uncool as well...
          $endgroup$
          – Andrés E. Caicedo
          35 mins ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


          • 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%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f325796%2famorphous-proper-classes-in-mk%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

          Oświęcim Innehåll Historia | Källor | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmeny50°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.2213950°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.221393089658Nordisk familjebok, AuschwitzInsidan tro och existensJewish Community i OświęcimAuschwitz Jewish Center: MuseumAuschwitz Jewish Center

          Valle di Casies Indice Geografia fisica | Origini del nome | Storia | Società | Amministrazione | Sport | Note | Bibliografia | Voci correlate | Altri progetti | Collegamenti esterni | Menu di navigazione46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)Sito istituzionaleAstat Censimento della popolazione 2011 - Determinazione della consistenza dei tre gruppi linguistici della Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige - giugno 2012Numeri e fattiValle di CasiesDato IstatTabella dei gradi/giorno dei Comuni italiani raggruppati per Regione e Provincia26 agosto 1993, n. 412Heraldry of the World: GsiesStatistiche I.StatValCasies.comWikimedia CommonsWikimedia CommonsValle di CasiesSito ufficialeValle di CasiesMM14870458910042978-6

          Typsetting diagram chases (with TikZ?) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to define the default vertical distance between nodes?Draw edge on arcNumerical conditional within tikz keys?TikZ: Drawing an arc from an intersection to an intersectionDrawing rectilinear curves in Tikz, aka an Etch-a-Sketch drawingLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themHow to place nodes in an absolute coordinate system in tikzCommutative diagram with curve connecting between nodesTikz with standalone: pinning tikz coordinates to page cmDrawing a Decision Diagram with Tikz and layout manager