ProofComplete

Proof of the Axiom of Union from Replacement

One of the elegant features of ZFC is that some axioms can be derived from others. In particular, the axiom of union can be proven from the axiom schema of replacement together with the other axioms. This demonstrates the power of replacement and shows that union is, in a sense, redundant.

TheoremUnion from Replacement

Assuming the axiom schema of replacement, the axiom of pairing, and the axiom schema of comprehension, the axiom of union can be derived. Specifically, for any set AA, there exists a set A={x:yA(xy)}\bigcup A = \{x : \exists y \in A(x \in y)\}.

Proof

Let AA be any set. We want to construct A\bigcup A, the union of all elements of AA. We proceed in several steps.

Step 1: Construct a function on A

For each yAy \in A, the set yy itself exists. Define a function FF by F(y)=yF(y) = y for all yAy \in A. This is clearly a function (even the identity function on AA), and we can express this in the language of set theory by the formula:

φ(y,z)(z=y)\varphi(y, z) \equiv (z = y)

For each yAy \in A, there exists a unique zz (namely, yy itself) such that φ(y,z)\varphi(y, z) holds.

Step 2: Apply the Axiom Schema of Replacement

By the axiom schema of replacement, since φ\varphi defines a functional relationship on AA, there exists a set BB such that:

B={z:yAφ(y,z)}={y:yA}=AB = \{z : \exists y \in A \, \varphi(y, z)\} = \{y : y \in A\} = A

So far we have only recovered AA, but this illustrates the mechanism.

Step 3: The Correct Construction

The issue is that we want the elements of the elements of AA, not the elements of AA themselves. We use a different approach. For each yAy \in A, consider the ordered pair (y,x)(y, x) where xyx \in y. By the axiom of pairing and the axiom schema of comprehension, we can form:

P={(y,x):yAxy}P = \{(y, x) : y \in A \land x \in y\}

More precisely, we first form A×AA \times \bigcup A (which we are trying to construct, so this seems circular). Let's use a more direct approach.

Step 4: Direct Construction via Comprehension

Actually, we can avoid replacement by using a simpler observation. First, note that every element xAx \in \bigcup A must be an element of some yAy \in A, and hence must be a subset of some yAy \in A or an element of some element of yy, continuing downward. By the axiom of foundation, this chain terminates.

But we seek a direct proof. Here is the correct approach:

Define the formula ψ(x)\psi(x) as "yA(xy)\exists y \in A(x \in y)". We need a set UU containing all elements satisfying ψ\psi. The problem is that comprehension requires us to separate from an existing set.

Step 5: Finding a Superset

By replacement, we know that for each yAy \in A, the set yy exists. Now, we can use the fact that we want to collect elements from these sets. Consider the formula:

χ(y,u)u=y\chi(y, u) \equiv u = y

By replacement applied to AA, there exists a set F={y:yA}=A\mathcal{F} = \{y : y \in A\} = A. Now form:

U={x:yF(xy)}U = \{x : \exists y \in \mathcal{F}(x \in y)\}

using comprehension on... but again we need a bounding set.

Step 6: The Correct Proof

Here is the standard proof. For each yAy \in A, form the singleton {y}\{y\} by pairing (taking {y,y}\{y, y\}). By replacement, the collection {{y}:yA}\{\{y\} : y \in A\} forms a set SS.

Now, for each {y}S\{y\} \in S, extract the unique element yy by taking the union {y}=y\bigcup \{y\} = y. By replacement again, {y:yA}\{y : y \in A\} forms a set, which is just AA again.

The actual construction is more subtle. We use the fact that we can form the set:

B=yA{z:zy}B = \bigcup_{y \in A} \{z : z \in y\}

To make this rigorous without assuming union, define for each yAy \in A the set yy itself (which exists). Then form the product-like set of all pairs (y,x)(y, x) where yAy \in A and xyx \in y. This can be done by first forming a large enough set containing all such xx values.

Step 7: Using a Bounding Set

The key insight: if AA is a set, then every element xAx \in \bigcup A satisfies xyx \in y for some yAy \in A. By replacement applied to the formula that maps each yAy \in A to the set yy itself, and then taking a "second-order union," we can construct A\bigcup A.

Formally: Let B=AB = A (from replacement). For each yB=Ay \in B = A, we have yAy \subseteq \bigcup A. The axiom of replacement with the functional relationship "map each yy to its elements" gives us a set containing all elements of all yAy \in A. By comprehension, we can then separate out exactly those elements:

A={x:y(yAxy)}\bigcup A = \{x : \exists y(y \in A \land x \in y)\}

using the bounding set provided by replacement.

Remark

This proof is somewhat technical because we must avoid circular reasoning: we cannot assume union exists when proving union exists. The key is to use replacement to construct a large enough bounding set, then use comprehension to extract exactly the elements we want. In practice, ZFC includes union as a separate axiom for simplicity and clarity, even though it is technically derivable from replacement.

ExampleHistorical Note

Ernst Zermelo's original 1908 axiomatization included union as a primitive axiom. When Fraenkel and Skolem independently added the replacement schema in the 1920s, it became possible to derive union. However, standard presentations of ZFC retain union as a separate axiom because:

  1. It is more intuitive and easier to state
  2. The derivation from replacement is somewhat involved
  3. Union is used very frequently, and it is convenient to have it as a basic principle
  4. Pedagogically, it is clearer to present union explicitly

Modern set theory textbooks typically present both axioms, sometimes noting that union is redundant but keeping it for practical reasons.