Sets and extensions in the twentieth century (Q2433860): Difference between revisions

The volume under review contains eleven chapters, the first seven of which document the historical development of modern, that is twentieth-century, ZFC set theory. The eighth chapter describes some alternative set theories, and the last three concern categorical logic and type theory, alternative takes, as it were, on the ZFC treatment of extensions. Each chapter has its own theme and style together with its own bibliography. Some chapters contain cross references to other entries in the collection; this helps avoid unnecessary overlap. There is an index for the entire volume. Georg Cantor's work on sets of uniqueness for trigonometric series in the last quarter of the nineteenth century was the genesis of the subject we call set theory. The so-called ``naive'' theory of sets that arose through Cantor's creative genius was distinguished by its matter-of-fact acceptance of the actual infinite, the extension of the number concept into the transfinite via ordering -- the ordinals -- and via equipollence -- the cardinals, and its preoccupation with the continuum. Cantors last publications on set theory appeared in 1895 and 1897 [\textit{G. Cantor}, ``Beiträge zur Begründung der transfiniten Mengenlehre. I, II'', Math. Ann. 46, 481--512 (1895; JFM 26.0081.01); ibid. 49, 207--246 (1897; JFM 28.0061.08)]. This happened just as the fruits of his creation were being recognized by mathematicians in other areas, especially analysis. The beginning of the twentieth century witnessed the appearance of the second generation of Cantorians. Zermelo and Hausdorff were most prominent in this group, and they represented the two trends that were to predominate in set theory's subsequent development: Zermelo with his axiomatization of the set concept (ZFC) founded abstract set theory and Hausdorff with his deep investigations into ordered sets advanced set theory as a useful branch of mathematics, deserving of study in its own right. Contemporaneously, whole areas arose that were built on set-theoretical concepts: for example, measure theory, point set topology, and the special area of analysis called descriptive set theory. As the century moved on, set theory and its ``offspring'' gathered adherents in locales beyond Germany's borders. Yet the pace of set theory's development was uneven. To the casual outside observer, the flow of progress for the first sixty-three years of the last century appeared glacial, interrupted by a few sudden outbursts of deep insight and heightened activity (Gödel's constructible sets is a prime example). This ended when Paul Cohen's forcing construction and its resulting plethora of independence results (1963) ushered in an era of frenzied activity that carried over into the present century. Of course, the volume under review amply documents the post-Cohen renaissance, but it also documents internal developments in set theory that belie our ``casual'' observer's view of the period 1900--1963. We now list the separate chapters and offer brief remarks on their contents: {\parindent=6mm \begin{itemize}\item[(1)] \textit{Akihiro Kanamori}, ``Set theory from Cantor to Cohen'' (pp. 1--71). This is a revised and expanded version of the author's [``The mathematical development of set theory from Cantor to Cohen'', Bull. Symb. Log. 2, No. 1, 1--71 (1996; Zbl 0851.04001)]. \item[(2)] \textit{Juris Stepräns}, ``History of the continuum in the 20th century'' (pp. 73--144). The author traces ``the growing understanding of the continuum, as well as its related cardinals and associated combinatorial structures \dots''. \item[(3)] \textit{Jean A. Larson}, ``Infinite combinatorics'' (pp. 145--357). In this longest chapter, the author proceeds chronologically decade by decade. One novelty: biographical details for the protagonists are given in footnotes and in the body of the text. \item[(4)] \textit{Akihiro Kanamori}, ``Large cardinals'' (pp. 359--413). The post-Cohen study of strong axioms of infinity. \item[(5)] \textit{William J. Mitchell}, ``Inner models for large cardinals'' (pp. 415--456). The development of inner models for large cardinals in the last quarter of the twentieth century. \item[(6)] \textit{Paul B. Larson}, ``A brief history of determinacy'' (pp. 457--507). Games set-theorists play. \item[(7)] \textit{Menachem Kojman}, ``Singular cardinals: from Hausdorff's gaps to Shelah's pcf theory'' (pp. 509--558). Singular cardinals move to center stage. \item[(8)] \textit{M. Randall Holmes}, \textit{Thomas Forster} and \textit{Thierry Libert}, ``Alternative set theories'' (pp. 559--632). No proselytizing, just other possibilities. \item[(9)] \textit{John L. Bell}, ``Types, sets, and categories'' (pp. 633--687). The evolution of type theory and its ``more intimate relationship with category theory.'' \item[(10)] \textit{Jean-Pierre Marquis} and \textit{Gonzalo E. Reyes}, ``The history of categorical logic: 1963--1977'' (pp. 689--800). An account of the work of the ``Montreal school'' of Lawvere, Joyal, and their associates. \item[(11)] \textit{Fairouz Kamareddine}, \textit{Twaan Laan} and \textit{Robert Constable}, ``Russell's orders in Kripke's theory of truth and computational type theory'' (pp. 801--845). The use of orders in computational type theory. \end{itemize}} The articles of this volume will not be indexed individually.