Talk:Set (mathematics): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Subpagination Bot m (Add {{subpages}} and remove checklist (details)) |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (→Paradoxes, ordered sets: new section) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
== Paradoxes, ordered sets == | |||
In the beginning, a set is described in an axiomatic way, without a rigorous definition. Have you thought about text that avoids Russell's Paradox? http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/ | |||
I came to the article because I wanted to link to "[[ordered set]]". Is that one of the special sets here, should there be a section for it, or should there be a new article? For that matter, should this refer to or define [[tuple]]s? | |||
[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 11:06, 28 July 2008 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 10:06, 28 July 2008
Paradoxes, ordered sets
In the beginning, a set is described in an axiomatic way, without a rigorous definition. Have you thought about text that avoids Russell's Paradox? http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/
I came to the article because I wanted to link to "ordered set". Is that one of the special sets here, should there be a section for it, or should there be a new article? For that matter, should this refer to or define tuples?
Howard C. Berkowitz 11:06, 28 July 2008 (CDT)