Non axiomatic set theory

[lemgruber]

Hello Brothers,

I'm a brazilian admirator of math and philosofy, my english is very poor, because I ask apologize antecipated.
I whish yours opinion about a theorem, if I must go on, or forget about. let see:

Became G a set of total possible of existence, in the form:

{x e G/ x property of a total possible of existence}

think existence in all levels.

Theorem: First cause

"If set G is not a subset of nine other existent set, what import to say, him is self cause, so him is perfect, and finite."

Prove for contradiction: G is not a subset, but is imperfect. So must exist least one element what is not a property of G,
became possible a existence of a set compound by elements of G and a least one element, so G became a subset. Absurd(contradiction).

in other hand, let see: the set G is perfect, but is a subset of another set. but if G is all possible of existence, a set what a contain G do no property
elements , because this not have existence of ents what sustain this set. Absurd(contradiction).

Q.E.D.

if theorem is true, let say what set exist, is cause by yourself and perfect e finite. I know what this prove seems very simple, but if is true another consequences of him, maybe not be so simple.

thanks antecipated,

Atenciously,

Lucio Marcos Lemgruber

Dear friends,

A first problem whith a theorem,is that, the definition of set leaves a russell paradox, so, I have try solve the problem saying what exist a other contradiction before a paradox, is that, how can be a set of the all other sets if all other sets be in using, must be another thing not a set, \I confess,
not know call that, either proof a existence of entity, but is the way open!

Lucio

 

[lemgruber]

non axiomatic set theorem

Hello Brothers,

I'm a brazilian admirator of math and philosofy, my english is very poor, because I ask apologize antecipated.
I whish yours opinion about a theorem, if I must go on, or forget about. let see:

Became G a set of total possible of existence, in the form:

{x e G/ x property of a total possible of existence}

think existence in all levels.

Theorem: First cause

"If set G is not a subset of nine other existent set, what import to say, him is self cause, so him is perfect, and finite."

Prove for contradiction: G is not a subset, but is imperfect. So must exist least one element what is not a property of G,
became possible a existence of a set compound by elements of G and a least one element, so G became a subset. Absurd(contradiction).

in other hand, let see: the set G is perfect, but is a subset of another set. but if G is all possible of existence, a set what a contain G do no property
elements , because this not have existence of ents what sustain this set. Absurd(contradiction).

Q.E.D.

if theorem is true, let say what set exist, is cause by yourself and perfect e finite. I know what this prove seems very simple, but if is true another consequences of him, maybe not be so simple.

thanks antecipated,

Atenciously,

Lucio Marcos Lemgruber

Dear friends,

A first problem whith a theorem,is that, the definition of set leaves a russell paradox, so, I have try solve the problem saying what exist a other contradiction before a paradox, is that, how can be a set of the all other sets if all other sets be in using, must be another thing not a set, \I confess,
not know call that, either proof a existence of entity, but is the way open!

Lucio

the question of existence, deserve a better explanation:

I don't know if talk about my true objective whith this theorem, the philosofy be treatise like a non science because can't demonstrate yours metaphisics concepts. for exemple, Sartre, is a simple poetry, when confront a formalist demonstration.
I think what a philosofy like a science. the first concept in usual metaphisics, is "being", but beyond don't be demonstred, make be a possibilitie of dialetc, our better saying, open a possibilitie a existence of opositives. to escape of this error, I retry a one concept before, or, a possibilitie of being, because not can oposity in the rest, only "impossibilitie of existence", and "impossibilitie of existence" even can be put in a set , because don't suport a existence of a enty, like a set. You see. the first cause not have a negative cause in our side. Remenber God is jelous(sorry by joke).

one more time, I ask apologize by the horror english, thanks by patience
and I hope your help my dear friend, in ardue task.

Lucio

 

[lemgruber]

theorem axiom of separation and yours implications in methaphisics

the question of existence, deserve a better explanation:

I don't know if talk about my true objective whith this theorem, the philosofy be treatise like a non science because can't demonstrate yours metaphisics concepts. for exemple, Sartre, is a simple poetry, when confront a formalist demonstration.
I think what a philosofy like a science. the first concept in usual metaphisics, is "being", but beyond don't be demonstred, make be a possibilitie of dialetc, our better saying, open a possibilitie a existence of opositives. to escape of this error, I retry a one concept before, or, a possibilitie of being, because not can oposity in the rest, only "impossibilitie of existence", and "impossibilitie of existence" even can be put in a set , because don't suport a existence of a enty, like a set. You see. the first cause not have a negative cause in our side. Remenber God is jelous(sorry by joke).

one more time, I ask apologize by the horror english, thanks by patience
and I hope your help my dear friend, in ardue task.

Lucio

In philosofy we beginin whith a "being" concept, what generate your contrary, or, "don't being". but I propose beginin with concept, "possibilities of existence", because is correct talk the possible, became before a concept of being. well, lets use the axiom of title above to create a set, what empty all possibility of existence for another set. we do it, because a russell paradox, in proceed we cheat the paradox. In essence, the axiom say what a set B exist, and we can get describe (thrue way of a property) the elements that set, so exist a set B, subset of G, what have this elements.
defined G and yours subsets have a property "possibilitie of existence".
theorem:
"If set G is not a subset of none other existent set whith as a same property what him self, what import to say, him is self cause, so him is perfect, and finite."
let's proof: Prove for contradiction: G is not a subset, but is imperfect. So must exist least one element what is not a property of G, became possible a existence of a set compound by elements of G and a least one element more, so G became a subset. Absurd(contradiction).
In other hand, let see: the set G is perfect, but is a subset of another set. but if G is all possible of existence, a set what a contain G do no property elements , because this not have existence of ents what sustain this set. Absurd(contradiction).
Q.E.D.
If theorem is true, let say what set exist, is cause by yourself and perfect e finite. I know what this prove seems very simple, but if is true, another consequences of him, maybe not be so simple, see, the set G don't have opositive(contrary), because only impossibilities in the rest, don't possible exist , even a set. the first subset of G, call "existence", but because the restriction impose by G, even 'not exist' too in definition.if theorem is true, let say what set exist, is cause by yourself and perfect e finite. I know what this prove seems very simple, but if is true, another consequences of him, maybe not be so simple. What say this things of new for the philosofy: there no theory of contraries(opositives), doesn't exist dialectic. the evil, hate, disrespect and other negative concepts simple not exist, and never existed, all impression of force this concept came of kaus, but kaus don't give to us nothing, only retired, because promove only force out of control. I liked to thanks to this site for the oportunity of expression, I don't speak english, forgive me all the words wrong, what I utilized. thanks again Lucio and team Lemgruber.


I use the translate of google, and I think be little better.
thanks fellars.