Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

40 \(\Rightarrow\) 17
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
40 \(\Rightarrow\) 39 clear
39 \(\Rightarrow\) 8 clear
8 \(\Rightarrow\) 9 Was sind und was sollen die Zollen?, Dedekind, [1888]
9 \(\Rightarrow\) 17 The independence of Ramsey's theorem, Kleinberg, E.M. 1969, J. Symbolic Logic

Here are the links and statements of the form equivalence classes referenced above:

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
40:

\(C(WO,\infty)\):  Every well orderable set of non-empty sets has a choice function. Moore, G. [1982], p 325.

39:

\(C(\aleph_{1},\infty)\): Every set \(A\) of non-empty sets such that \(\vert A\vert = \aleph_{1}\) has a choice function. Moore, G. [1982], p. 202.

8:

\(C(\aleph_{0},\infty)\):

9:

Finite \(\Leftrightarrow\) Dedekind finite: \(W_{\aleph_{0}}\) Jech [1973b]: \(E(I,IV)\) Howard/Yorke [1989]): Every Dedekind finite set is finite.

17:

Ramsey's Theorem I: If \(A\) is an infinite set and the family of all 2 element subsets of \(A\) is partitioned into 2 sets \(X\) and \(Y\), then there is an infinite subset \(B\subseteq A\) such that all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(X\) or all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(Y\). (Also, see Form 325.), Jech [1973b], p 164 prob 11.20.

Comment:

Back