Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

264 \(\Rightarrow\) 48-K
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
264 \(\Rightarrow\) 202 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
202 \(\Rightarrow\) 40 clear
40 \(\Rightarrow\) 122 clear
122 \(\Rightarrow\) 48-K clear

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

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
264:

\(H(C,P)\): Every connected relation \((X,R)\) contains a \(\subseteq\)-maximal partially ordered set.

202:

\(C(LO,\infty)\): Every linearly ordered family of non-empty sets has  a choice function.

40:

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

122:

\(C(WO,<\aleph_{0})\): Every well ordered set of non-empty finite sets has a choice function.

48-K:

If \(K\) is a finite subset of \(\omega-\{0,1\}\), \(C(WO,K)\): For every \(n\in K,\) \(C(WO,n)\).

Comment:

Back