Implications

This non-implication, Form 96 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 17, 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: 1480, whose string of implications is:
    14 \(\Rightarrow\) 107 \(\Rightarrow\) 96
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 5, Form 14 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 17 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 14 <p> <strong>BPI:</strong> Every Boolean algebra has a prime ideal. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 17 <p> <strong>Ramsey's Theorem I:</strong> If \(A\) is an infinite set and the family of all 2 element subsets of \(A\) is partitioned into 2 sets \(X\) and \(Y\), then there is an infinite subset \(B\subseteq A\) such that all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(X\) or all 2 element subsets of \(B\) belong to \(Y\). (Also, see <a href="/form-classes/howard-rubin-325">Form 325</a>.), <a href="/books/8">Jech [1973b]</a>, p 164 prob 11.20. </p>

  • This non-implication was constructed without the use of this last code 2/1 implication

The conclusion Form 96 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 17 then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal M1\) Cohen's original model Add a denumerable number of generic reals (subsets of \(\omega\)), \(a_1\), \(a_2\), \(\cdots\), along with the set \(b\) containing them

Edit | Back