Axiom Of Choice

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

259 \(\Rightarrow\) 83 given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication	Reference
259 \(\Rightarrow\) 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 \(\Rightarrow\) 39	clear
39 \(\Rightarrow\) 8	clear
8 \(\Rightarrow\) 9	Was sind und was sollen die Zollen?, Dedekind, [1888]
9 \(\Rightarrow\) 83	The Axiom of Choice, Jech, 1973b, page 52 problem 9

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

Howard-Rubin Number	Statement
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.
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.
39:	\(C(\aleph_{1},\infty)\): Every set \(A\) of non-empty sets such that \(\vert A\vert = \aleph_{1}\) has a choice function. Moore, G. [1982], p. 202.
8:	\(C(\aleph_{0},\infty)\):
9:	Finite \(\Leftrightarrow\) Dedekind finite: \(W_{\aleph_{0}}\) Jech [1973b]: \(E(I,IV)\) Howard/Yorke [1989]): Every Dedekind finite set is finite.
83:	\(E(I,II)\) Howard/Yorke [1989]: \(T\)-finite is equivalent to finite.

Comment:

Back