This non-implication,
Form 93 \( \not \Rightarrow \)
Form 16,
whose code is 4, is constructed around a proven non-implication as follows:
Hypothesis | Statement |
---|---|
Form 170 | <p> \(\aleph_{1}\le 2^{\aleph_{0}}\). </p> |
Conclusion | Statement |
---|---|
Form 6 | <p> \(UT(\aleph_0,\aleph_0,\aleph_0,\Bbb R)\): The union of a denumerable family of denumerable subsets of \({\Bbb R}\) is denumerable. </p> |
The conclusion Form 93 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 16 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 \(ZF + V = L\) |
\(\cal M36\) Figura's Model | Starting with a countable, standard model, \(\cal M\), of \(ZFC + 2^{\aleph_0}=\aleph_{\omega +1}\), Figura uses forcing conditions that are functions from a subset of \(\omega\times\omega\) to \(\omega_\omega\) to construct a symmetric extension of \(\cal M\) in which there is an uncountable well ordered subset of the reals (<a href="/form-classes/howard-rubin-170">Form 170</a> is true), but \(\aleph_1= \aleph_{\omega}\) so \(\aleph_1\) is singular (<a href="/form-classes/howard-rubin-34">Form 34</a> is false) |