It is shown that AC, the axiom of choice for families of non-empty subsets of the real line ℝ, does not imply the statement PW, the powerset of ℝ can be well ordered. It is also shown that the statement “the set of all denumerable subsets of ℝ has size 2math image” is strictly weaker than AC and each of the statements “if every member of an infinite set of cardinality 2math image has power 2math image, then the (...) union has power 2math image” and “ℵ ≠ ℵω” is Hartogs' aleph, the least ℵ not ≤ 2math image), is strictly weaker than the full axiom of choice AC. (shrink)

We work in set-theory without choice ZF. A set is Countable if it is finite or equipotent with ${\Bbb N}$ . Given a closed subset F of [0, 1] I which is a bounded subset of $\ell ^{1}(I)$ (resp. such that $F\subseteq c_{0}(I)$ ), we show that the countable axiom of choice for finite sets, (resp. the countable axiom of choice AC N ) implies that F is compact. This enhances previous results where AC N (...) (resp. the axiom of Dependent Choices) was required. If I is linearly orderable (for example $I={\Bbb R}$ ), then, in ZF, the closed unit ball of the Hilbert space $\ell ^{2}(I)$ is (Loeb-)compact in the weak topology. However, the weak compactness of the closed unit ball of $\ell ^{2}(\scr{P}({\Bbb R}))$ is not provable in ZF. (shrink)

In this paper we study some statements similar to the Partition Principle and the Trichotomy. We prove some relationships between these statements, the Axiom of Choice, and the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis. We also prove some independence results. MSC: 03E25, 03E50, 04A25, 04A50.

We investigate the set theoretical strength of some properties of normality, including Urysohn's Lemma, Tietze-Urysohn Extension Theorem, normality of disjoint unions of normal spaces, and normality of Fσ subsets of normal spaces.

It is shown that for compact metric spaces the following statements are pairwise equivalent: “X is Loeb”, “X is separable”, “X has a we ordered dense subset”, “X is second countable”, and “X has a dense set G = ∪{Gn : n ∈ ω}, ∣Gn∣ < ω, with limn→∞ diam = 0”. Further, it is shown that the statement: “Compact metric spaces are weakly Loeb” is not provable in ZF0 , the Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory without the axiom of regularity, (...) and that the countable axiom of choice for families of finite sets CACfin does not imply the statement “Compact metric spaces are separable”. (shrink)

We study theorems from Functional Analysis with regard to their relationship with various weak choice principles and prove several results about them: “Every infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a well‐orderable Hamel basis” is equivalent to ; “ can be well‐ordered” implies “no infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a Hamel basis of cardinality ”, thus the latter statement is true in every Fraenkel‐Mostowski model of ; “No infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a Hamel basis of cardinality ” is not provable in ; (...) “No infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a well‐orderable Hamel basis of cardinality ” is provable in ; (the Axiom of Choice for denumerable families of non‐empty finite sets) is equivalent to “no infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a Hamel basis which can be written as a denumerable union of finite sets”; Mazur's Lemma (“If X is an infinite‐dimensional Banach space, Y is a finite‐dimensional vector subspace of X, and, then there is a unit vector such that for all and all scalars α”) is provable in ; “A real normed vector space X is finite‐dimensional if and only if its closed unit ball is compact” is provable in ; (Principle of Dependent Choices) + “ can be well‐ordered” does not imply the Hahn‐Banach Theorem () in ; and “no infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a Hamel basis of cardinality ” are independent from each other in ; “No infinite‐dimensional Banach space can be written as a denumerable union of finite‐dimensional subspaces” lies in strength between (the Axiom of Countable Choice) and ; implies “No infinite‐dimensional Banach space can be written as a denumerable union of closed proper subspaces” which in turn implies ; “Every infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a denumerable linearly independent subset” is a theorem of, but not a theorem of ; and “Every infinite‐dimensional Banach space has a linearly independent subset of cardinality ” implies “every Dedekind‐finite set is finite”. (shrink)

We show that the countable axiom of choice CAC strictly implies the statements “Lindelöf metric spaces are second countable” “Lindelöf metric spaces are separable”. We also show that CAC is equivalent to the statement: “If is a Lindelöf topological space with respect to the base ℬ, then is Lindelöf”.

A weak form of intuitionistic set theory WST lacking the axiom of extensionality is introduced. While WST is too weak to support the derivation of the law of excluded middle from the axiom of choice, we show that bee.ng up WST with moderate extensionality principles or quotient sets enables the derivation to go through.

The minimal ordinal-connection axiom $$MOC$$ was introduced by the first author in R. Freire. (South Am. J. Log. 2:347–359, 2016). We observe that $$MOC$$ is equivalent to a number of statements on the existence of certain hierarchies on the universe, and that under global choice, $$MOC$$ is in fact equivalent to the $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$. Our main results then show that $$MOC$$ corresponds to a weak version of global choice in models of the $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$ : it can fail (...) in models of the $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$ without global choice, but also global choice can fail in models of $$MOC$$. (shrink)

We study statements about countable and well-ordered unions and their relation to each other and to countable and well-ordered forms of the axiom of choice. Using WO as an abbreviation for “well-orderable”, here are two typical results: The assertion that every WO family of countable sets has a WO union does not imply that every countable family of WO sets has a WO union; the axiom of choice for WO families of WO sets does not (...) imply that the countable union of countable sets is WO. (shrink)

We show that the statement “separable, countably compact, regular spaces are Baire” is deducible from a strictly weaker form than AC, namely, CAC . We also find some characterizations of the axiom of dependent choices.

We shall investigate certain statements concerning the rigidity of unary functions which have connections with forms of the axiom of choice.

Let ZF denote Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (without the axiom of choice), and let $M$ be a countable transitive model of ZF. The method of forcing extends $M$ to another model $M\lbrack G\rbrack$ of ZF (a "generic extension"). If the axiom of choice holds in $M$ it also holds in $M\lbrack G\rbrack$, that is, the axiom of choice is preserved by generic extensions. We show that this is not true for many weak forms (...) of the axiom of choice, and we derive an application to Boolean toposes. (shrink)

We investigate, within the framework of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory ZF, the interrelations between weak forms of the Axiom of Choice AC restricted to sets of reals.

Consider the following well-known result from the theory of normed linear spaces ([2], p. 80, 4(b)): (g) the unit ball of the (continuous) dual of a normed linear space over the reals has an extreme point. The standard proof of (~) uses the axiom of choice (AG); thus the implication AC~(w) can be proved in set theory. In this paper we show that this implication can be reversed, so that (*) is actually eq7I2valent to the axiom of (...) choice. From this we derive various corollaries, for example: the conjunction of the Boolean prime ideal theorem and the Krein-Milman theorem implies the axiom of choice, and the Krein-Milman theorem is not derivable from the Boolean prime ideal theorem. (shrink)

Let NBG be von Neumann-Bernays-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.

Working in the context of restricted forms of the Axiom of Choice, we consider the problem of splitting the ordinals below λ of cofinality θ into λ many stationary sets, where θ < λ are regular cardinals. This is a continuation of [4].

We combine a variety of constructive methods (including forcing, realizability, asymmetric interpretation), to obtain consistency results concerning combinatory logic with extensionality and (forms of) the axiom of choice.

We work in set theory ZF without axiom of choice. Though the Hahn-Banach theorem cannot be proved in ZF, we prove that every Gateaux-differentiable uniformly convex Banach space E satisfies the following continuous Hahn-Banach property: if p is a continuous sublinear functional on E, if F is a subspace of E, and if f: F → ℝ is a linear functional such that f ≤ p|F then there exists a linear functional g : E → ℝ such that (...) g extends f and g ≤ p. We also prove that the continuous Hahn-Banach property on a topological vector space E is equivalent to the classical geometrical forms of the Hahn-Banach theorem on E. We then prove that the axiom of Dependent choices DC is equivalent to Ekeland's variational principle, and that it implies the continuous Hahn-Banach property on Gateaux-differentiable Banach spaces. Finally, we prove that, though separable normed spaces satisfy the continuous Hahn-Banach property, they do not satisfy the whole Hahn-Banach property in ZF+DC. (shrink)

Those incompleteness theorems mean the relation of (Peano) arithmetic and (ZFC) set theory, or philosophically, the relation of arithmetical finiteness and actual infinity. The same is managed in the framework of set theory by the axiom of choice (respectively, by the equivalent well-ordering "theorem'). One may discuss that incompleteness form the viewpoint of set theory by the axiom of choice rather than the usual viewpoint meant in the proof of theorems. The logical corollaries from that "nonstandard" (...) viewpoint the relation of set theory and arithmetic are demonstrated. (shrink)

We show that the Axiom of Countable Choice is necessary and sufficient to prove that the existence of a Borel measure on a pseudometric space such that the measure of open balls is positive and finite implies separability of the space. In this way a negative answer to an open problem formulated in Górka (Am Math Mon 128:84–86, 2020) is given. Moreover, we study existence of maximal $$\delta $$ δ -separated sets in metric and pseudometric spaces from the (...) point of view the Axiom of Choice and its weaker forms. (shrink)

In the context of [Formula: see text], we analyze a version of Hindman’s finite unions theorem on infinite sets, which normally requires the Axiom of Choice to be proved. We establish the implication relations between this statement and various classical weak choice principles, thus precisely locating the strength of the statement as a weak form of the [Formula: see text].

In set theory without the Axiom of Choice (), we investigate the problem of the placement of Łoś's Theorem () in the hierarchy of weak choice principles, and answer several open questions from the book Consequences of the Axiom of Choice by Howard and Rubin, as well as an open question by Brunner. We prove a number of results summarised in § 3.

A new method is presented for constructing models of set theory, using a technique of forming pseudo-ultrapowers. In the presence of the axiom of choice, the traditional ultrapower construction has proven to be extremely powerful in set theory and model theory; if the axiom of choice is not assumed, the fundamental theorem of ultrapowers may fail, causing the ultrapower to lose almost all of its utility. The pseudo-ultrapower is designed so that the fundamental theorem holds even (...) if choice fails; this is arranged by means of an application of the omitting types theorem. The general theory of pseudo-ultrapowers is developed. Following that, we study supercompactness in the absence of choice, and we analyze pseudo-ultrapowers of models of the axiom of determinateness and various infinite exponent partition relations. Relationships between pseudo-ultrapowers and forcing are also discussed. (shrink)

We study within the framework of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory ZF the role that the axiom of choice plays in the theory of Lindelöf metric spaces. We show that in ZF the weak choice principles: Every Lindelöf metric space is separable and Every Lindelöf metric space is second countable are equivalent. We also prove that a Lindelöf metric space is hereditarily separable iff it is hereditarily Lindelöf iff it hold as well the axiom of choice (...) restricted to countable sets and to topologies of Lindelöf metric spaces as the countable union theorem restricted to Lindelöf metric spaces. (shrink)

We prove that, in the framework of ordered geometry, the inner form of the Pasch axiom does not imply its outer form . We also show that OP can be properly split into IP and the weak Pasch axiom.

We establish the following results: 1. In ZF (i.e., Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory minus the Axiom of Choice AC), for every set I and for every ordinal number α ≥ ω, the following statements are equivalent: (a) The Tychonoff product of| α| many non-empty finite discrete subsets of I is compact. (b) The union of| α| many non-empty finite subsets of I is well orderable. 2. The statement: For every infinite set I, every closed subset of the Tychonoff product (...) [0, 1] I which consists of functions with finite support is compact, is not provable in ZF set theory. 3. The statement: For every set I, the principle of dependent choices relativised to I implies the Tychonoff product of countably many non-empty finite discrete subsets of I is compact, is not provable in ZF⁰ (i.e., ZF minus the Axiom of Regularity). 4. The statement: For every set I, every ℵ₀-sized family of non-empty finite subsets of I has a choice function implies the Tychonoff product of ℵ₀ many non-empty finite discrete subsets of I is compact, is not provable in ZF⁰. (shrink)

Should weak forms of the axiom of choice really be accepted within constructive mathematics? A critical view of the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov interpretation, accompanied by the intention to include nondeterministic algorithms, leads us to subscribe to Richman's appeal for dropping countable choice. As an alternative interpretation of intuitionistic logic, we propose to renew dialogue semantics.

For every$n\in \omega \setminus \{0,1\}$we introduce the following weak choice principle:$\operatorname {nC}_{<\aleph _0}^-:$For every infinite family$\mathcal {F}$of finite sets of size at least n there is an infinite subfamily$\mathcal {G}\subseteq \mathcal {F}$with a selection function$f:\mathcal {G}\to \left [\bigcup \mathcal {G}\right ]^n$such that$f(F)\in [F]^n$for all$F\in \mathcal {G}$.Moreover, we consider the following choice principle:$\operatorname {KWF}^-:$For every infinite family$\mathcal {F}$of finite sets of size at least$2$there is an infinite subfamily$\mathcal {G}\subseteq \mathcal {F}$with a Kinna–Wagner selection function. That is, there is (...) a function$g\colon \mathcal {G}\to \mathcal {P}\left (\bigcup \mathcal {G}\right )$with$\emptyset \not =f(F)\subsetneq F$for every$F\in \mathcal {G}$.We will discuss the relations between these two choice principles and their relations to other well-known weak choice principles. Moreover, we will discuss what happens when we replace$\mathcal {F}$by a linearly ordered or a well-ordered family. (shrink)

We consider random choice rules that, by satisfying a weak form of Luce’s choice axiom, embody a form probabilistic rationality. We show that for this important class of stochastic choices, the law of demand for normal goods—arguably the main result of traditional consumer theory—continues to hold on average when strictly dominated alternatives are dismissed.

The Fraenkel-Mostowski method has been widely used to prove independence results among weak versions of the axiom of choice. In this paper it is shown that certain statements cannot be proved by this method. More specifically it is shown that in all Fraenkel-Mostowski models the following hold: 1. The axiom of choice for sets of finite sets implies the axiom of choice for sets of well-orderable sets. 2. The Boolean prime ideal theorem implies (...) a weakened form of Sikorski's theorem. (shrink)

The idea of the positive theory is to avoid the Russell's paradox by postulating an axiom scheme of comprehension for formulas without "too much" negations. In this paper, we show that the axiom of choice is inconsistent with the positive theory $GPK^+ \infty$.

We investigate certain statements about factors of unary functions which have connections with weak forms of the axiom of choice. We discuss more extensively the fine structure of Howard and Rubin's Form 314 from [4]. Some of our set-theoretic results have also interesting recursive versions.

This paper presents four theorems that connect continuity postulates in mathematical economics to solvability axioms in mathematical psychology, and ranks them under alternative supplementary assumptions. Theorem 1 connects notions of continuity (full, separate, Wold, weak Wold, Archimedean, mixture) with those of solvability (restricted, unrestricted) under the completeness and transitivity of a binary relation. Theorem 2 uses the primitive notion of a separately continuous function to answer the question when an analogous property on a relation is fully continuous. Theorem 3 (...) provides a portmanteau theorem on the equivalence between restricted solvability and various notions of continuity under weak monotonicity. Finally, Theorem 4 presents a variant of Theorem 3 that follows Theorem 1 in dispensing with the dimensionality requirement and in providing partial equivalences between solvability and continuity notions. These theorems are motivated for their potential use in representation theorems. (shrink)

Especially nice models of intuitionistic set theories are realizability models $V$, where $\mathcal A$ is an applicative structure or partial combinatory algebra. This paper is concerned with the preservation of various choice principles in $V$ if assumed in the underlying universe $V$, adopting Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel as background theory for all of these investigations. Examples of choice principles are the axiom schemes of countable choice, dependent choice, relativized dependent choice and the presentation axiom. It (...) is shown that any of these axioms holds in $V$ for every applicative structure $\mathcal A$ if it holds in the background universe.1 It is also shown that a weak form of the countable axiom of choice, $\textbf{AC}^{\boldsymbol{\omega, \omega }}$, is rendered true in any $V$ regardless of whether it holds in the background universe. The paper extends work by McCarty and Rathjen. (shrink)

In this paper is used to denote Jensen's modification of Quine's ‘new foundations’ set theory () fortified with a type‐level pairing function but without the axiom of choice. The axiom is the variant of the axiom of counting which asserts that no finite set is smaller than its own set of singletons. This paper shows that proves the consistency of the simple theory of types with infinity (). This result implies that proves that consistency of, and (...) that proves the consistency of. (shrink)

In the realm of metric spaces the role of choice principles is investigated.

It is easy to prove in ZF− that a relation R satisfies the maximal condition if and only if its transitive hull R* does; equivalently: R is well-founded if and only if R* is. We will show in the following that, if the maximal condition is replaced by the chain condition, as is often the case in Algebra, the resulting statement is not provable in ZF− anymore . More precisely, we will prove that this statement is equivalent in ZF− to (...) the countable axiom of choice ACω. Moreover, applying this result we will prove that the axiom of dependent choices, restricted to partial orders as used in Algebra, already implies the general form for arbitrary relations as formulated first by Teichmüller and, independently, some time later by Bernays and Tarski. (shrink)

We show that the property of sequential compactness for subspaces of.

We show that for various set theories T including ZF, T + AC is conservative over T for sentences of the form \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\forall x \exists! y}$$\end{document}A(x, y) where A(x, y) is a Δ0 formula.

In their logical analysis of theorems about disjoint rays in graphs, Barnes, Shore, and the author (hereafter BGS) introduced a weak choice scheme in second-order arithmetic, called the $\Sigma ^1_1$ axiom of finite choice (hereafter finite choice). This is a special case of the $\Sigma ^1_1$ axiom of choice ( $\Sigma ^1_1\text {-}\mathsf {AC}_0$ ) introduced by Kreisel. BGS showed that $\Sigma ^1_1\text {-}\mathsf {AC}_0$ suffices for proving many of the aforementioned theorems in (...) graph theory. While it is not known if these implications reverse, BGS also showed that those theorems imply finite choice (in some cases, with additional induction assumptions). This motivated us to study the proof-theoretic strength of finite choice. Using a variant of Steel forcing with tagged trees, we show that finite choice is not provable from the $\Delta ^1_1$ -comprehension scheme (even over $\omega $ -models). We also show that finite choice is a consequence of the arithmetic Bolzano–Weierstrass theorem (introduced by Friedman and studied by Conidis), assuming $\Sigma ^1_1$ -induction. Our results were used by BGS to show that several theorems in graph theory cannot be proved using $\Delta ^1_1$ -comprehension. Our results also strengthen results of Conidis. (shrink)