Implications

This non-implication, Form 212 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 285, whose code is 6, is constructed around a proven non-implication as follows:
Note: This non-implication is actually a code 4, as this non-implication satisfies the transferability criterion. Click Transfer details for all the details)

  • An (optional) implication of code 1 or code 2 is given. In this case, it's Code 2: 5985, whose string of implications is:
    91 \(\Rightarrow\) 79 \(\Rightarrow\) 212
  • A proven non-implication whose code is 5. In this case, it's Code 3: 227, Form 91 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 285 whose summary information is:
    Hypothesis Statement
    Form 91 <p> \(PW\):  The power set of a well ordered set can be well ordered. </p>

    Conclusion Statement
    Form 285 <p> Let \(E\) be a set and \(f: E\to E\), then \(f\) has a fixed point if and only if \(E\) is not the union of three mutually disjoint sets \(E_1\), \(E_2\) and \(E_3\) such that \(E_i \cap f(E_i) = \emptyset\) for \(i=1, 2, 3\). </p>

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

The conclusion Form 212 \( \not \Rightarrow \) Form 285 then follows.

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

Name Statement
\(\cal N22(p)\) Makowski/Wi\'sniewski/Mostowski Model (Where \(p\) is aprime) Let \(A=\bigcup\{A_i: i\in\omega\}\) where The \(A_i\)'s are pairwisedisjoint and each has cardinality \(p\)

Edit | Back