This non-implication, Form 375 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 287, 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: 10245, whose string of implications is:
    43 \(\Rightarrow\) 375
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 3. In this case, it's Code 3: 238, Form 43 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 142 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 43 <p> \(DC(\omega)\) (DC), <strong>Principle of Dependent Choices:</strong> If \(S\)  is  a relation on a non-empty set \(A\) and \((\forall x\in A) (\exists y\in A)(x S y)\)  then there is a sequence \(a(0), a(1), a(2), \ldots\) of elements of \(A\) such that \((\forall n\in\omega)(a(n)\mathrel S a(n+1))\).  See <a href="/articles/Tarski-1948">Tarski [1948]</a>, p 96, <a href="/articles/Levy-1964">Levy [1964]</a>, p. 136. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 142 <p> \(\neg  PB\):  There is a set of reals without the property of Baire.  <a href="/books/8">Jech [1973b]</a>, p. 7. </p>

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 7875, whose string of implications is:
    287 \(\Rightarrow\) 222 \(\Rightarrow\) 142

The conclusion Form 375 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 287 then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal M5(\aleph)\) Solovay's Model An inaccessible cardinal \(\aleph\) is collapsed to \(\aleph_1\) in the outer model and then \(\cal M5(\aleph)\) is the smallest model containing the ordinals and \(\Bbb R\)
\(\cal M18\) Shelah's Model I Shelah modified Solovay's model, <a href="/models/Solovay-1">\(\cal M5\)</a>, and constructed a model without using an inaccessible cardinal in which the <strong>Principle of Dependent Choices</strong> (<a href="/form-classes/howard-rubin-43">Form 43</a>) is true and every set of reals has the property of Baire (<a href="/form-classes/howard-rubin-142">Form142</a> is false)

Edit | Back