home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: sci.logic
- Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!gumby!destroyer!ubc-cs!fornax!jamie
- From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
- Subject: Re: Set of all sets
- Message-ID: <1992Sep5.022356.18971@cs.sfu.ca>
- Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
- References: <4134@seti.UUCP> <1992Sep4.172833.20527@guinness.idbsu.edu> <1992Sep4.233526.24088@infodev.cam.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:23:56 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- Actually, there are now several interesting type-free,
- consistent, non-trivial set theories. Gilmore's NaDSet (Journal
- of Symbolic Logic 1986) is joined by the "map theory" by ??
- (someone from Germany, sorry I've forgotten the name) in the
- latest issue of Theoretical Computer Science, and a set theory
- by Fairouz Kamareddine in Volume 1 Issue 1 of the new Journal of
- Logic, Language and Information.
-
- Interestingly, the TCS writer and Kamareddine seem not to
- have known about each other's work or Gilmore's, though they
- refer to Aczel's papers on non-well-founded set theory, which in
- turn refer to Gilmore's earlier work.
-
- All three papers refer to (and, basically, refute) Scott's
- 1975 paper "Combinators and Classes", which bemoaned the lack of
- type-free set theories and implied that set theory was not a
- suitable basis for theoretical computer science. Any of the
- three set theories looks like it would work OK as a basis. (I
- prefer Gilmore's for sentimental reasons and because it's simpler.)
-
- I wouldn't consider NF and its extensions to be really
- "type-free" because they sneak type theory ideas in the back
- door with the stratification condition.
-
- --Jamie.
- jamie@cs.sfu.ca
- "Every \item command in item_list must have an optional argument." LaTeX pg.168
-