We have seen that ordinal numbers are downward closed. But does it also hold in the opposite direction? Is there a "set of all ordinals" $\Omega$?

The Burali-Forti paradox shows that such a set cannot exist. In other words, the notion of a set is "too narrow" to be used for summing up all existing ordinal numbers.

# Definition: The Class of all Ordinals $\Omega$

In the terms of the Neumann-Berneys-Gödel set theory (NBG), $\Omega$ as a collection of all ordinal numbers is not a set but a proper class.

### Notes

• For a proper class, it is forbidden to be an element of a class (especially itself), therefore $\Omega\not\in\Omega.$
• Nevertheless, all ordinals $\alpha\in\Omega$ build an infinite chain of being contained in each other.
• Remember that we have already constructed the minimal inductive set $\omega$ independently from the discussion of ordinal numbers while we were talking about the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms.
• $\omega$ can be visualized as follows:

Please note that $\omega\neq\Omega$, i.e. the set $\omega$ never can equal (!) the class $\Omega.$ However, it was constructed using a similar, recursive principle:

1. $\emptyset \in \omega$
2. $\emptyset \in \omega$

Proofs: 1
Propositions: 2

Thank you to the contributors under CC BY-SA 4.0!

Github:

### References

#### Bibliography

1. Hoffmann, Dirk W.: "Grenzen der Mathematik - Eine Reise durch die Kerngebiete der mathematischen Logik", Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 2011
2. Hoffmann, D.: "Forcing, Eine Einführung in die Mathematik der Unabhängigkeitsbeweise", Hoffmann, D., 2018