Bourbaki

Theorem 1

Tag 03H9, permanent. Cite it as [Bourbaki, Tag 03H9].

Theory of Sets, chapter II, § 1. Collectivizing relations

The relation (∀x)(x∉X)(\forall x)(x \notin X) is functional in X.

For the relation (∀x)(x∉X)(\forall x)(x \notin X) implies (∀Y)(X⊂Y)(\forall Y)(X \subset Y); by virtue of the axiom of extent, the relation (∀x)(x∉X)(\forall x)(x \notin X) is therefore single-valued in X. On the other hand, the relation (∀x)(x∉∁YY)(\forall x)(x \notin \complement_Y Y) is true, which proves that (∃X)(∀x)(x∉X)(\exists X)(\forall x)(x \notin X) is true.

¶ The term τx((∀x)(x∉X))\tau_x((\forall x)(x \notin X)) corresponding to this functional relation is represented by the functional symbol ∅\emptyset, and is called the empty set [^1]; the relation (∀x)(x∉X)(\forall x)(x \notin X), which is equivalent to X=∅X = \emptyset, is read as follows: "*the set* X is empty". We have the theorems x∉∅x \notin \emptyset, ∅⊂X\emptyset \subset X, ∁XX=∅\complement_X X = \emptyset, ∁X∅=X\complement_X \emptyset = X. The relation X⊂∅X \subset \emptyset is equivalent to X=∅X = \emptyset. If R{x}R\{x\} is a relation, the relation (∀x)((x∈∅)⇒R{x})(\forall x)((x \in \emptyset) \Rightarrow R\{x\}) is true.

Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.

Cited by

Nothing.

Cites

Nothing.

Transcribed from the printed edition, 2004, Springer. Not translated.