Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

261 \(\Rightarrow\) 250
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
261 \(\Rightarrow\) 256 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
256 \(\Rightarrow\) 255 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
255 \(\Rightarrow\) 260 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
260 \(\Rightarrow\) 40 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
40 \(\Rightarrow\) 122 clear
122 \(\Rightarrow\) 250 clear

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

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
261:

\(Z(TR,T)\): Every transitive relation \((X,R)\) in which every subset which is a tree has an upper bound, has a maximal element.

256:

\(Z(P,F)\): Every partially ordered set \((X,R)\) in which every forest \(A\) has an upper bound, has a maximal element.

255:

\(Z(D,R)\): Every directed relation \((P,R)\) in which every ramified subset \(A\) has an upper bound, has a maximal element.

260:

\(Z(TR\&C,P)\): If \((X,R)\) is a transitive and connected relation in which every partially ordered subset has an upper bound, then \((X,R)\) has a maximal element.

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.

250:

\((\forall n\in\omega-\{0,1\})(C(WO,n))\): For every natural number \(n\ge 2\), every well ordered family of \(n\) element sets has a choice function.

Comment:

Back