Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

112 \(\Rightarrow\) 58
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
112 \(\Rightarrow\) 90 Equivalents of the Axiom of Choice II, Rubin/Rubin, 1985, page 79
90 \(\Rightarrow\) 51 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
51 \(\Rightarrow\) 208 Choice and cofinal well-ordered subsets, Morris, D.B. 1969, Notices Amer. Math. Soc.
208 \(\Rightarrow\) 58 clear

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

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
112:

\(MC(\infty,LO)\): For every family \(X\) of non-empty sets each of which can be linearly ordered there is a function \(f\) such that for all \(y\in X\), \(f(y)\) is a non-empty finite subset of \(y\).

90:

\(LW\):  Every linearly ordered set can be well ordered. Jech [1973b], p 133.

51:

Cofinality Principle: Every linear ordering has a cofinal sub well ordering.  Sierpi\'nski [1918], p 117.

208:

For all ordinals \(\alpha\), \(\aleph_{\alpha+1}\le 2^{\aleph_\alpha}\).

58:

There is an ordinal \(\alpha\) such that \(\aleph(2^{\aleph_{\alpha }})\neq\aleph_{\alpha +1}\). (\(\aleph(2^{\aleph_{\alpha}})\) is Hartogs' aleph, the least \(\aleph\) not \(\le 2^{\aleph _{\alpha}}\).)
Mathias [1979], p 126.

Comment:

Back