Implications

This non-implication, Form 121 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 11, 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: 914, Form 121 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 64 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 121 <p> \(C(LO,<\aleph_{0})\): Every linearly ordered set of non-empty finite sets has a choice function. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 64 <p> \(E(I,Ia)\) There are no amorphous sets. (Equivalently, every infinite set is the union of two disjoint infinite sets.) </p>

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 1278, whose string of implications is:
    11 \(\Rightarrow\) 12 \(\Rightarrow\) 336-n \(\Rightarrow\) 64

The conclusion Form 121 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 11 then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal N24\) Hickman's Model I This model is a variation of \(\cal N2\)
\(\cal N24(n)\) An extension of \(\cal N24\) to \(n\)-element sets, \(n>1\).\(A=\bigcup B\), where \( B=\{b_i: i\in\omega\}\) is a pairwise disjoint setof \(n\)-element sets \(\cal G\) is the group of all permutations of \(A\)which are permutations of \(B\); and \(S\) is the set of all finite subsets of\(A\)

Edit | Back