Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

261 \(\Rightarrow\) 25
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 \(\Rightarrow\) 259 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
259 \(\Rightarrow\) 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 \(\Rightarrow\) 25 Choice and cofinal well-ordered subsets, Morris, D.B. 1969, Notices Amer. Math. Soc.

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.

259:

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

51:

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

25:

\(\aleph _{\beta +1}\) is regular for all ordinals \(\beta\).

Comment:

Back