Timeline for Why are pure powers of the empty set insufficient as a definition for ordinals?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30 at 20:24 | history | edited | Invariance | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Apr 18 at 13:07 | comment | added | Invariance | @Gerry I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but the empty set is both the first von Neumann ordinal and first Zermelo ordinal. | |
| Apr 13 at 23:18 | comment | added | Gerry | Would not a set of zero elements, Set = {} still be an ordinal set? | |
| S Apr 10 at 3:25 | review | First answers | |||
| Apr 15 at 10:43 | |||||
| S Apr 10 at 3:25 | history | answered | Invariance | CC BY-SA 4.0 |