Axiom Of Choice

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

259 \(\Rightarrow\) 26 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 \(\Rightarrow\) 24	clear
24 \(\Rightarrow\) 26	Zermelo's Axiom of Choice, Moore, 1982, 66 Le¸cons sur la th´eorie des fonctions, Borel, [1898]

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:	\(C(\aleph_{0},\infty)\):
24:	\(C(\aleph_0,2^{(2^{\aleph_0})})\): Every denumerable collection of non-empty sets each with power \(2^{(2^{\aleph_{0}})}\) has a choice function.
26:	\(UT(\aleph_{0},2^{\aleph_{0}},2^{\aleph_{0}})\): The union of denumerably many sets each of power \(2^{\aleph _{0}}\) has power \(2^{\aleph_{0}}\).

Comment:

Back