We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:
Implication | Reference |
---|---|
2 \(\Rightarrow\) 3 |
On successors in cardinal arithmetic, Truss, J. K. 1973c, Fund. Math. |
3 \(\Rightarrow\) 9 |
Cardinal addition and the axiom of choice, Howard, P. 1974, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. |
9 \(\Rightarrow\) 82 | clear |
82 \(\Rightarrow\) 387 |
"Dense orderings, partitions, and weak forms of choice", Gonzalez, C. 1995a, Fund. Math. |
Here are the links and statements of the form equivalence classes referenced above:
Howard-Rubin Number | Statement |
---|---|
2: | Existence of successor cardinals: For every cardinal \(m\) there is a cardinal \(n\) such that \(m < n\) and \((\forall p < n)(p \le m)\). |
3: | \(2m = m\): For all infinite cardinals \(m\), \(2m = m\). |
9: | Finite \(\Leftrightarrow\) Dedekind finite: \(W_{\aleph_{0}}\) Jech [1973b]: \(E(I,IV)\) Howard/Yorke [1989]): Every Dedekind finite set is finite. |
82: | \(E(I,III)\) (Howard/Yorke [1989]): If \(X\) is infinite then \(\cal P(X)\) is Dedekind infinite. (\(X\) is finite \(\Leftrightarrow {\cal P}(X)\) is Dedekind finite.) |
387: | DPO: Every infinite set has a non-trivial, dense partial order. (A partial ordering \(<\) on a set \(X\) is dense if \((\forall x, y\in X)(x \lt y \to (\exists z \in X)(x \lt z \lt y))\) and is non-trivial if \((\exists x,y\in X)(x \lt y)\)). |
Comment: