Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

260 \(\Rightarrow\) 282
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
260 \(\Rightarrow\) 40 Variations of Zorn's lemma, principles of cofinality, and Hausdorff's maximal principle, Part I and II, Harper, J. 1976, Notre Dame J. Formal Logic
40 \(\Rightarrow\) 39 clear
39 \(\Rightarrow\) 8 clear
8 \(\Rightarrow\) 282 Infinite exponent partition relations and well-ordered choice, Kleinberg, E.M. 1973, J. Symbolic Logic
note-97

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

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
260:

\(Z(TR\&C,P)\): If \((X,R)\) is a transitive and connected relation in which every partially ordered subset has an upper bound, then \((X,R)\) has a maximal element.

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:

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

282:

\(\omega\not\to(\omega)^{\omega}\).

Comment:

Back