The Stacks project

3.2 Everything is a set

Most mathematicians think of set theory as providing the basic foundations for mathematics. So how does this really work? For example, how do we translate the sentence “$X$ is a scheme” into set theory? Well, we just unravel the definitions: A scheme is a locally ringed space such that every point has an open neighbourhood which is an affine scheme. A locally ringed space is a ringed space such that every stalk of the structure sheaf is a local ring. A ringed space is a pair $(X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$ consisting of a topological space $X$ and a sheaf of rings $\mathcal{O}_ X$ on it. A topological space is a pair $(X, \tau )$ consisting of a set $X$ and a set of subsets $\tau \subset \mathcal{P}(X)$ satisfying the axioms of a topology. And so on and so forth.

So how, given a set $S$ would we recognize whether it is a scheme? The first thing we look for is whether the set $S$ is an ordered pair. This is defined (see [Jech], page 7) as saying that $S$ has the form $(a, b) := \{ \{ a\} , \{ a, b\} \}$ for some sets $a, b$. If this is the case, then we would take a look to see whether $a$ is an ordered pair $(c, d)$. If so we would check whether $d \subset \mathcal{P}(c)$, and if so whether $d$ forms the collection of sets for a topology on the set $c$. And so on and so forth.

So even though it would take a considerable amount of work to write a complete formula $\phi _{scheme}(x)$ with one free variable $x$ in set theory that expresses the notion “$x$ is a scheme”, it is possible to do so. The same thing should be true for any mathematical object.

You can type your comment here, use the preview option to see what it will look like. If your comment is on a lemma, please leave your comment on the page of the lemma. Same with remarks, propositions, theorems, etc.

​