Implications

We have the following indirect implication of form equivalence classes:

214 \(\Rightarrow\) 17
given by the following sequence of implications, with a reference to its direct proof:

Implication Reference
214 \(\Rightarrow\) 9 clear
9 \(\Rightarrow\) 17 The independence of Ramsey's theorem, Kleinberg, E.M. 1969, J. Symbolic Logic

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

Howard-Rubin Number Statement
214:

\(Z(\omega)\): For every family \(A\) of infinite sets, there is a function \(f\) such that for all \(y\in A\), \(f(y)\) is a non-empty subset of \(y\) and \(|f(y)|=\aleph_{0}\).

9:

Finite \(\Leftrightarrow\) Dedekind finite: \(W_{\aleph_{0}}\) Jech [1973b]: \(E(I,IV)\) Howard/Yorke [1989]): Every Dedekind finite set is finite.

17:

Ramsey's Theorem I: If \(A\) is an infinite set and the family of all 2 element subsets of \(A\) is partitioned into 2 sets \(X\) and \(Y\), then there is an infinite subset \(B\subseteq A\) such that all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(X\) or all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(Y\). (Also, see Form 325.), Jech [1973b], p 164 prob 11.20.

Comment:

Back