Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:20:44.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Independence results for class forms of the axiom of choice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Paul E. Howard ,
Arthur L. Rubin  and
Jean E. Rubin
Paul E. Howard
Affiliation:
Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilantie, Michigan 48197
Arthur L. Rubin
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125
Jean E. Rubin
Affiliation:
Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Let NBG be von Neumann-Bemays-Gödel set theory without the axiom of choice and let NBGA be the modification which allows atoms. In this paper we consider some of the well-known class or global forms of the wellordering theorem, the axiom of choice, and maximal principles which are known to be equivalent in NBG and show they are not equivalent in NBGA.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , December 1978 , pp. 673 - 684
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Felgner, U., Choice functions on sets and classes, Studies in logic, vol. 84, Sets and classes (Müller, G.M., Editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1976, pp. 217–255.Google Scholar
[2]Felgner, U. and Jech, T. J., Variants of the axiom of choice in set theory with atoms, Funda-menta Mathematicae, vol. 79 (1973), pp. 79–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Halpern, J. D., Contributions to the study of the independence of the axiom of choice, Ph.D. Thesis, Berkeley, 1962.Google Scholar
[4]Harper, J. M. and Rubin, J. E., Variations of Zorn's lemma, Principles of cofinality, and Hausdorff's maximal principle, Part II, Class forms, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 18 (1977), pp. 151–163.Google Scholar
[5]Howard, P. E. and Rubin, J. E., The axiom of choice and linearly ordered sets, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 97(1977), pp. 11–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Jech, T. J., The axiom of choice, Studies in logic, vol. 75, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1973.Google Scholar
[7]Jech, T. J., Lectures in set theory with particular emphasis on themethod of forcing, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 217, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1971.Google Scholar
[8]Läuchli, H., The independence of the ordering principle from a restricted axiom of choice, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 54 (1964), pp. 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Mostowski, A., Über die Unabhängigkeit des Wohlordnungssatzes vom Ordnungsprinzip, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 32 (1939), pp. 201–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Rubin, H. and Rubin, J. E., Equivalents of the axiom of choice, Studies in logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1963.Google Scholar