Alphabeta Math
RemarkRemark: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)verified 2026-07-29 (claude-fable-5)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

What each result on this page costs in choice, and where the continuum escapes what ZFC can decide

Remark

This item is bookkeeping, in the manner of The proved choice ledger: hypotheses, equivalences, and upper bounds: it records what each result stated here actually costs, so that anything quoting a result from this page knows whether it is quoting a theorem of ZF or a consequence of the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice).

Theorems of ZF, using no choice principle at all.

Costing the Axiom of Choice, and named as such in their own statements.

Equivalent to the Axiom of Choice over ZF, so neither weaker nor stronger: comparability of arbitrary sets (Comparability of arbitrary sets, that any two sets admit an injection one way or the other, is equivalent to the Axiom of Choice) and Tarski's square law (Tarski: the Axiom of Choice is equivalent to the statement that A×A≈A for every infinite set A, so extending Hessenberg's theorem from the alephs to arbitrary sets is exactly as strong as choice). The first is recorded in The proved choice ledger: hypotheses, equivalences, and upper bounds as Hartogs' result, quoted there and proved here.

Countable choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)) is not used anywhere on this page. Where an argument might have needed it, the ordinal structure supplied a canonical least element instead.

What the hypotheses do and do not say. The regularity results named above carry their choice hypotheses explicitly. This ledger records the proofs under those hypotheses; it makes no model-theoretic claim that the hypotheses are necessary. That lower-bound question belongs to the later choiceless-model development.

What this page therefore does and does not settle about 2ℵ0. It settles that 2ℵ0 is an aleph, granted choice; that it is strictly above ℵ0; and that its cofinality is uncountable. It proves no exact value and makes no independence claim.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

75 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources