On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 10:11:07PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote:
Felipe Almeida Lessa wrote:
On 7/12/07, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How come the set of all sets doesn't exist?
http://www.google.com/search?q=set+of+all+sets
leads to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_of_all_sets which has the
answer, I think.
Ouch.
Clearly, set theory is way more complicated than people make out. (I always
thought a "set" was just a collection of objects...)
If a set is just a *finite* collection of objects, then things are
usually fairly straightforward. It's those pesky infinite sets that
complicate things...especially the ones which aren't constructible.
Phil
--
http://www.kantaka.co.uk/ .oOo. public key: http://www.kantaka.co.uk/gpg.txt
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
