Name: Anonymous 2008-05-16 14:40
In my undergrad logic course, we came across a couple of results about finiteness not being definable, using compactness of 1st order logic. In particular, I remember the class of finite sets not being axiomatizable (in the sense that there's no set of wffs S such that A |= S iff A is a finite structure).
This runs contrary to what I've seen in discussions of set theory, i.e. defining a subset of A as {x in A : x is finite}. But can we construct a first order wff P(x) meaning "x is finite"? I guess I'm just asking for a formal justification of definitions like this. Any help would be appreciated.
This runs contrary to what I've seen in discussions of set theory, i.e. defining a subset of A as {x in A : x is finite}. But can we construct a first order wff P(x) meaning "x is finite"? I guess I'm just asking for a formal justification of definitions like this. Any help would be appreciated.