Implications

This non-implication, Form 198 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 225, whose code is 4, is constructed around a proven non-implication as follows:

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 2669, whose string of implications is:
    40 \(\Rightarrow\) 39 \(\Rightarrow\) 8 \(\Rightarrow\) 9 \(\Rightarrow\) 198
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 259, Form 40 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 70 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 40 <p> \(C(WO,\infty)\):  Every well orderable set of non-empty sets has a choice function. <a href="/books/2">Moore, G. [1982]</a>, p 325. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 70 <p> There is a non-trivial ultrafilter on \(\omega\). <a href="/books/8">Jech [1973b]</a>, prob 5.24. </p>

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 10128, whose string of implications is:
    225 \(\Rightarrow\) 70

The conclusion Form 198 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 225 then follows.

Finally, the
List of models where hypothesis is true and the conclusion is false:

Name Statement
\(\cal M2\) Feferman's model Add a denumerable number of generic reals to the base model, but do not collect them

Edit | Back