Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

264 \(\Rightarrow\) 212
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 \(\Rightarrow\) 91 note-75
91 \(\Rightarrow\) 79 clear
79 \(\Rightarrow\) 212 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.

91:

\(PW\):  The power set of a well ordered set can be well ordered.

79:

\({\Bbb R}\) can be well ordered.  Hilbert [1900], p 263.

212:

\(C(2^{\aleph_{0}},\subseteq{\Bbb R})\): If \(R\) is a relation on \({\Bbb R}\) such that for all \(x\in{\Bbb R}\), there is a \(y\in{\Bbb R}\) such that \(x\mathrel R y\), then there is a function \(f: {\Bbb R} \rightarrow{\Bbb R}\) such that for all \(x\in{\Bbb R}\), \(x\mathrel R f(x)\).

Comment:

Back