Implications

• Implications Home
• Complete List
• Search

This non-implication, Form 204 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 211, 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: 10218, whose string of implications is: 3 \(\Rightarrow\) 204
• A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 235, Form 3 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 5 whose summary information is:
  

  Hypothesis	Statement
  Form 3	\(2m = m\): For all infinite cardinals \(m\), \(2m = m\).

  
  

  Conclusion	Statement
  Form 5	<p> \(C(\aleph_0,\aleph_0,\Bbb R)\): Every denumerable set of non-empty denumerable subsets of \({\Bbb R}\) has a choice function. </p>

  
  
• An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 6969, whose string of implications is: 211 \(\Rightarrow\) 94 \(\Rightarrow\) 5

The conclusion Form 204 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 211 then follows.

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

Name	Statement
\(\cal M6\) Sageev's Model I	Using iterated forcing, Sageev constructs \(\cal M6\) by adding a denumerable number of generic tree-like structuresto the ground model, a model of \(ZF + V = L\)