Notions of symmetry in set theory with classes (Q1591208): Difference between revisions

In the context of Gödel-Bernays set theory without the axiom of foundation \((\text{GB}^-)\) the author considers the following notions of symmetry: A class \(X\) with a total preordering \(\preceq\) is 0-symmetric, if all initial segments \(\{y;y\preceq x\}\), \(x\in X\), are sets. It is \((m+1)\)-symmetric, if all initial segments are \(m\)-symmetric. The intuition behind this definition is a model \(M\) of \((\text{GB}^-)\) such that \(On^M= \alpha\). If a class \(X\in M\) has a wellordering of type \(\alpha\), or of type \(\alpha^+\), or \(\dots,\) then \(X\) is 0-symmetric, or 1-symmetric, or \dots (The axiom of foundation implies that \(X\), preordered by the rank function, is 0-symmetric.) This notion is correlated with class forms of Freiling's axioms [\textit{C. Freiling}, ``Axioms of symmetry: Throwing darts at the real number line'', J. Symb. Log. 51, 190-200 (1986; Zbl 0619.03035)]. \(A^{m+2}(X)\) is the following assertion: Given is a function \(F\) on the family \([X]^{m+1}\) of sets \(s\subseteq X\) with \(m +1\) elements such that \(F(s)\) is a subset of \(X\). Then there is an \(s\in[X]^{m+2}\) such that \(y\notin F(s \setminus \{y\})\), all \(y\in s\). (Freiling considers \(X =\mathbb{R}\), \(m= 0\), and \(F(s)\) of Lebesgue measure 0. Then an informal reasoning suggests that, upon throwing \(m + 2\) darts simultaneously at \(X\), it is likely that none is in the ``small'' set which is determined by \(F\) and the other \(m + 1\) darts.) It is consistent relatively to the existence of an inaccessible cardinal, that the axioms \(A^n\) are of a different strength. The main result shows that in GB\(^-\) together with strong global forms of the axiom of choice the following assertions are equivalent for a class \(X\): (i) There is a total preordering \(\preceq\) on \(X\) such that \((X,\preceq)\) is \(m\)-symmetric. (ii) \(X\) is a counterexample to the axiom \(A^{m+2}(X)\).