|
|
![[parent]](http://images.planetmath.org:8080/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Message
|
|
|
| ``Re: update suggestion''
by ratboy on 2006-02-27 13:47:37 |
|
| > _____________________________________________
>
> Thm. Let (M, <) be a (anti-reflexive) poset. The following
> are equivalent.
>
> (i) (M, <) is well-founded.
>
> (ii) Every totally ordered, nonempty S \subseteq M has a
> minimal element.
> _____________________________________________
Shouldn't "minimal" be "minimum" in (ii)? |
| | [ reply | up | top ] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
