Implications

This non-implication, Form 294 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 394, 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: 10070, whose string of implications is:
    231 \(\Rightarrow\) 294
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 880, Form 231 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 34 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 231 <p> \(UT(WO,WO,WO)\): The union of a well ordered collection of well orderable sets is well orderable. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 34 <p> \(\aleph_{1}\) is regular. </p>

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 9309, whose string of implications is:
    394 \(\Rightarrow\) 337 \(\Rightarrow\) 92 \(\Rightarrow\) 94 \(\Rightarrow\) 34

The conclusion Form 294 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 394 then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal M12(\aleph)\) Truss' Model I This is a variation of Solovay's model, <a href="/models/Solovay-1">\(\cal M5(\aleph)\)</a> in which \(\aleph\) is singular

Edit | Back