Talk:Collection of Sets Equivalent to Set Containing Empty Set is Proper Class

Just added a proof but think it needs some cleaning up. The main hole is that it has to be proven that $C$ is the collection of sets equivalent to $\set \O$. There may also be some links to definitions to add. It also may need to be proven more rigorously (by citing other proofs) that the image of the function is $V$. The needed edits aren't major though, I think all the barebones are there. This was my first edit so hope it's close to standard.

Just a few minor points:

First note our one-sentence-per-line policy.

Then note our formal style of construction: one statement per sentence; the implication chain goes rigorously forward; every concept is linked, however many times it appears on the page; structure of $\LaTeX$ markup is equally rigorous and formalised.

Neat proof, btw. Please feel free to raise pages that may cover the points you have raised. Perhaps you might want to step through the citation links appertaining to the Just & Weese resource and identify a) whether their analysis is genuinely missing those holes you mention (in which case either plug those holes or flag up where it is needd=ed), or b) if they *are* so included, then add links to those points as needed. --prime mover (talk) 06:38, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for cleaning it up! Didn't know about the one sentence per line policy, will do in the future. Is there a page denoting convention for the formal style of construction? --TheoLaLeo (talk) 06:57, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there's a whole pile of Help pages where everything is laid down. See the link in the menu on the left for starters.

Also note the policy of progressive indentation on talk pages. --prime mover (talk) 07:00, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and please sign your posts on talk pages. --prime mover (talk) 07:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)