We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:
Implication | Reference |
---|---|
133 \(\Rightarrow\) 231 | note-123 |
231 \(\Rightarrow\) 151 | clear |
151 \(\Rightarrow\) 122 |
Russell's alternative to the axiom of choice, Howard, P. 1992, Z. Math. Logik Grundlagen Math. note-27 |
122 \(\Rightarrow\) 327 | clear |
Here are the links and statements of the form equivalence classes referenced above:
Howard-Rubin Number | Statement |
---|---|
133: | Every set is either well orderable or has an infinite amorphous subset. |
231: | \(UT(WO,WO,WO)\): The union of a well ordered collection of well orderable sets is well orderable. |
151: | \(UT(WO,\aleph_{0},WO)\) (\(U_{\aleph_{1}}\)): The union of a well ordered set of denumerable sets is well orderable. (If \(\kappa\) is a well ordered cardinal, see note 27 for \(UT(WO,\kappa,WO)\).) |
122: | \(C(WO,<\aleph_{0})\): Every well ordered set of non-empty finite sets has a choice function. |
327: | \(KW(WO,<\aleph_0)\), The Kinna-Wagner Selection Principle for a well ordered family of finite sets: For every well ordered set \(M\) of finite sets there is a function \(f\) such that for all \(A\in M\), if \(|A|>1\) then \(\emptyset\neq f(A)\subsetneq A\). (See Form 15.) |
Comment: