Explain the ways in which Russell's paradox can be avoided
Let R be the set of all sets that are not members of themselves. If R qualifies as a member of itself, it would contradict its own definition as a set containing sets that are not members of themselves. On the other hand, if such a set is not a member of itself, it would qualify as a member of itself by the same definition. This contradiction is Russell's paradox. Symbolically:
without using ZFC
Also explain why and how 0=1
Oh and i only did maths for IT in uni last year which was such a bad module
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.