Implications

This non-implication, Form 0 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 71-alpha, whose code is 4, is constructed around a proven non-implication as follows:

  • This non-implication was constructed without the use of this first code 2/1 implication.
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 101, Form 0 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 183-alpha whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 0  \(0 = 0\).

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 183-alpha <p> There are no \(\aleph_{\alpha}\) minimal  sets.  That is, there are no sets \(X\) such that <ol type="1"> <li>\(|X|\) is incomparable with \(\aleph_{\alpha}\)</li> <li>\(\aleph_{\beta}<|X|\) for every \(\beta < \alpha \) and</li> <li>\(\forall Y\subseteq X, |Y|<\aleph_{\alpha}\) or \(|X-Y| <\aleph_{\alpha}\).</li> </ol> </p>

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 10308, whose string of implications is:
    71-alpha \(\Rightarrow\) 183-alpha

The conclusion Form 0 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 71-alpha then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal N27\) Hickman's Model II Let \(A\) be a set with cardinality\(\aleph_1\) such that \(A=\{(a_{\alpha},b_{\beta}) : \alpha < \omega, \beta< \omega_1\}\)

Edit | Back