Equivalence of Definitions of Ordered Pair

Theorem
The concept of an ordered pair can be formalized by the definition:


 * $\left({a, b}\right) = \left\{{\left\{{a}\right\}, \left\{{a, b}\right\}}\right\}$

This formalization justifies the existence of ordered pairs in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.

Equality of Ordered Pairs
From Equality of Ordered Pairs, we have that:
 * $\left\{{\left\{{a}\right\}, \left\{{a, b}\right\}}\right\} = \left\{{\left\{{c}\right\}, \left\{{c, d}\right\}}\right\} \iff a = c, b = d$

hence showing that this formalization fulfils the requirement for equality.

Existence of Cartesian Product
Let $A$ and $B$ be sets such that $a \in A$ and $b \in B$.

Then $\left\{{a}\right\} \subseteq A$ and $\left\{{b}\right\} \subseteq B$.

Therefore $\left\{{a, b}\right\} \subseteq A \cup B$.

As $\left\{{a}\right\} \subseteq A \cup B$, then:
 * $\left\{{a}\right\} \in \mathcal P \left({A \cup B}\right), \left\{{a, b}\right\} \in \mathcal P \left({A \cup B}\right)$

where $\mathcal P \left({A \cup B}\right)$ is the power set of $A \cup B$.

Thus:
 * $\left\{{\left\{{a}\right\}, \left\{{a, b}\right\}}\right\} \subseteq \mathcal P \left({A \cup B}\right)$

and so by definition of power set:
 * $\left\{{\left\{{a}\right\}, \left\{{a, b}\right\}}\right\} \in \mathcal P \left({\mathcal P \left({A \cup B}\right)}\right)$

Applying the axiom of specification and the axiom of extension, the unique set $A \times B$ is created which consists exactly of ordered pairs $\left({a, b}\right)$ such that $a \in A$ and $b \in B$.

Thus the existence of the cartesian product has been demonstrated.

Finally, in Subset of Cartesian Product it is demonstrated that every set of ordered pairs is the subset of the cartesian product of two sets.

This formalization was established in collaboration with Norbert Wiener.

Comment
The only reason for this formulation of ordered pairs is so their existence can be justified in the strictures of the axiomatic set theory, in particular Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Once that has been demonstrated, there is no need to invoke it again.

The fact that this formulation allows that:
 * $\left({a, b}\right) = \left({c, d}\right) \iff a = c, b = d$

is its stated aim.

The fact that $\left\{{a, b}\right\} \in \left({a, b}\right)$ is an unfortunate side-effect brought about by means of the definition.

It would be possible to add another axiom to ZFC specifically to allow for ordered pairs to be defined, and in some systems of axiomatic set theory this is what is done.