In mathematics and logic, Ackermann set theory (AST, also known as
A*/V
AST differs from Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory (ZF) in that it allows proper classes, that is, objects that are not sets, including a class of all sets.It replaces several of the standard ZF axioms for constructing new sets with a principle known as Ackermann's schema. Intuitively, the schema allows a new set to be constructed if it can be defined by a formula which does not refer to the class of all sets.In its use of classes, AST differs from other alternative set theories such as Morse–Kelley set theory and Von Neumann–Bernays–Gödel set theory in that a class may be an element of another class.
William N. Reinhardt established in 1970 that AST is effectively equivalent in strength to ZF, putting it on equal foundations. In particular, AST is consistent if and only if ZF is consistent.
L\{\in,V\
\in
V
M
V
M
V
We will refer to elements of
V
The following formulation is due to Reinhardt.[4] The five axioms include two axiom schemas.Ackermann's original formulation included only the first four of these, omitting the axiom of regularity.[5] [6] [7]
If two classes have the same elements, then they are equal.
\forallx (x\inA\leftrightarrowx\inB)\toA=B.
This axiom is identical to the axiom of extensionality found in many other set theories, including ZF.
Any element or a subset of a set is a set.
(x\iny\lorx\subseteqy)\landy\inV\tox\inV.
For any property, we can form the class of sets satisfying that property. Formally, for any formula
\phi
X
\existsX \forallx (x\inX\leftrightarrowx\inV\land\phi).
That is, the only restriction is that comprehension is restricted to objects in
V
For any formula
\phi
a1,\ldots,an,x
V
a1,\ldots,an\inV\land\forallx (\phi\tox\inV)\to\existsX{\in}V \forallx (x\inX\leftrightarrow\phi).
Ackermann's schema is a form of set comprehension that is unique to AST. It allows constructing a new set (not just a class) as long as we can define it by a property that does not refer to the symbol
V
Any non-empty set contains an element disjoint from itself:
\forallx\inV (x=\varnothing\lor\existsy(y\inx\landy\capx=\varnothing)).
Here,
y\capx=\varnothing
\not\existsz (z\inx\landz\iny)
This axiom is conservative in the sense that without it, we can simply use comprehension (axiom schema 3) to restrict our attention to the subclass of sets that are regular.[4]
Ackermann's original axioms did not include regularity, and used a predicate symbol
M
V
Mx
x\inV
M
x\inV
V
\phi=True
In axiomatic set theory, Ralf Schindler replaces Ackermann's schema (axiom schema 4) with the following reflection principle:for any formula
\phi
a1,\ldots,an
a1,\ldots,an{\in}V\to(\phi\leftrightarrow\phiV).
Here,
\phiV
\phi
V
\phi
\forallx
\existsx
\forallx{\in}V
\existsx{\in}V
Let
L\{\in\
V
In 1959, Azriel Lévy proved that if
\phi
L\{\in\
\phiV
\phi
In 1970, William N. Reinhardt proved that if
\phi
L\{\in\
\phi
\phiV
Therefore, AST and ZF are mutually interpretable in conservative extensions of each other. Thus they are equiconsistent.
A remarkable feature of AST is that, unlike NBG and its variants, a proper class can be an element of another proper class.[7]
An extension of AST for category theory called ARC was developed by F.A. Muller. Muller stated that ARC "founds Cantorian set-theory as well as category-theory and therefore can pass as a founding theory of the whole of mathematics".[9]