*In construction.* $\text{ZFC}$, the usual first-order axiomatic set theory, can only manipulate sets, and cannot formalize the notion of a proper class (e.g. the class of all sets, $V$), so when one needs to manipulate proper class objects, it is tempting to switch to a second-order logic form of $\text{ZFC}$. However, because many useful theorems such as Gödel's Completeness Theorem does not apply to second-order logic theories, it is more convenient to use first-order two-sorted axiomatic theories with two types of variables, one for sets and one for classes. Two such "false" second-order theories, $\text{NBG}$ and $\text{MK}$, are the most widely used extensions of $\text{ZFC}$. Throughout this article, "*first-order (set theory) formula*" means a formula in the language of $\text{ZFC}$, eventually with class parameters, but only set quantifiers. "*second-order (set theory) formula*" means a formula in the language of $\text{NBC}$ and $\text{MK}$, i.e. it can contain class quantifiers. **Von Neumann-Bernays-Gödel set theory** (commonly abbreviated as *$\text{NBG}$* or *$\text{GCB}$*) is a conservative extension of $\text{ZFC}$ - that is, it proves the same first-order sentences as $\text{ZFC}$. It is equiconsistent with $\text{ZFC}$. However, unlike $\text{ZFC}$ and $\text{MK}$, it is possible to finitely axiomatize $\text{NBG}$. It was named after John von Neumann, Paul Bernays and Kurt Gödel. **Morse-Kelley set theory** (commonly abbreviated as *$\text{MK}$* or *$\text{KM}$*) is an extension of $\text{NBG}$ which is stronger than $\text{ZFC}$ and $\text{NBG}$ in consistency strength. It was named after John L. Kelley and Anthony Morse. It only differs from $\text{NBG}$ by a single axiom-schema. It is not finitely axiomatizable. It is possible to turn both theories into first-order axiomatic set theories with only class variables, a class $X$ is called a set (abbreviated $\text{M}X$) iff $\exists Y(X\in Y)$. One can also define $\text{M}X\equiv X\in V$ with $V$ a symbol of the language representing the universal class containing all sets. That is, a set is a class member of another class. ## Axioms of $\text{NBG}$ and $\text{MK}$ We will be using capital letters to denote classes and lowercase letters to denote sets. The following axioms are common to both $\text{NBG}$ and $\text{MK}$: - **Extensionality:** two classes are equal iff they have the same elements: $\forall X\forall Y(X=Y\iff\forall z(z\in X\iff z\in Y))$. - **Regularity:** every class is disjoint from one of its elements: $\forall X(\exists a(a\in X)\implies\exists x(x\in X\land\forall y(y\in x\implies y\not\in X)))$. - **Infinity:** there exists an infinite set. For example, $\exists x(\exists a(a\in x)\land\forall y(y\in x\implies\exists z(y\in z\land z\in x))$. - **Union:** the union of the elements of a set is a set : $\forall x\exists y\forall z(z\in y\iff\exists w(z\in w\land w\in x))$. - **Pairing:** the pair of two sets is itself a set: $\forall x\forall y\exists z\forall w(w\in z\iff(w=x\lor w=y))$. - **Powerset:** the powerset of a set is a set: $\forall x\exists y\forall z(z\in y\iff\forall w(w\in z\implies w\in x))$. - **Limitation of Size:** a class $X$ is proper if and only if there is bijection between $X$ and the universal class $V$. The axiom of limitation of size implies the axiom of global choice ("there is a well-ordering of the universe") and $\text{ZFC}s axiom of replacement. Using the one-sorted version of those theories, pairing becomes $\forall X\forall Y(\text{M}X\land\text{M}Y\Rightarrow\exists Z(\text{M}Z\land X\in Z\land Y\in Z))$. The other axioms are modified similarly. $\text{NBG}$ the the theory obtained by adding the following axiom-scheme: - **Class comprehension:** for every *first-order* formula $\varphi(x)$ with a free variables $x$ and class parameters, there exists a class containing all sets $x$ such that $\varphi(x)$. Not that the created class only contains sets, in particular there is no class of all classes. $\text{MK}$ is obtained by removing the "first-order" restriction in class comprehension, i.e. second-order formulas are now allowed. ### Finitely axiomatizing $\text{NBG}$ $\text{NBG}$ can be finitely axiomatized as its class comprehension axiom can be replaced by the following set of axioms: For every classes $A$ and $B$, - The complement $V\setminus A=\{x:x\not\in A\}$ exists. - The intersection $A\cap B=\{x:x\in A\land x\in B\}$ exists. - The range $\{y:\exists x((x,y)\in A\}$ exists, using $(x,y)=\{\{x\},\{x,y\}\}$. - The product $A\times B=\{(a,b):a\in A\land b\in B\}$ exists. - The classes $\{(x,y):x\in y\}$ and $\{(x,y):x=y\}$ exist. - The following classes exist: $\{(b,a):(a,b)\in A\}$, $\{(b,(a,c)):(a,(b,c))\in A\}$. - The following classes exist: $\{((a,b),c):(a,(b,c))\in A\}$, $\{(d,(a,(b,c))):(d,((a,b),c))\in A\}$. ## Models of $\text{MK}$ In consistency strength, $\text{MK}$ is stronger than [$\text{ZFC}$](ZFC.md "ZFC") and weaker than the existence of an [inaccessible](Inaccessible.md "Inaccessible") cardinal. It directly implies the consistency of $\text{ZFC}$ plus "there is a proper class of [worldly](Worldly.md "Worldly") cardinals stationary in $\text{Ord}quot;. However, if a cardinal $\kappa$ is inaccessible then $V_{\kappa+1}\models\text{MK}$, also $\text{def}(V_\kappa)$ satisfies $\text{NBG}$ minus global choice (i.e. replacing limitation of size by $\text{ZFC}s axiom of replacement). Because it uses classes, set models of $\text{MK}$ are generally taken to be the powerset of some model of $\text{ZFC}$. For this reason, a large cardinal axiom with $V_\kappa$ having some elementary property can be strengthened by instead using $V_{\kappa+1}$. When doing this with [$\Pi_m^0$-indescribability](Indescribable.md "Indescribable"), one achieves [$\Pi_m^1$-indescribability](Indescribable.md "Indescribable") (which is considerably stronger). When doing this with [0-extendibility](Extendible.md "Extendible") (which is equiconsistent with $\text{ZFC}$), one achieves [1-extendibility](Extendible.md "Extendible"). ## Between $\text{NBG}$ and $\text{MK}$ ### Class forcing theorem and equivalents ### Class determinacy of open games This article is a stub. Please help us to improve Cantor's Attic by adding information.