Re: does 2^m=2^n imply m=n?

It does because the function 2^x is increasing (strictly) in x.

"K. P. Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> student wrote:
>
> >K.P.Hart wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>It's truth is relative:
> >>the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis implies yes
> >>Martin's Axiom plus not-CH implies $2^{\aleph_0}=2^{\aleph_1}$
> >>Both are consistent with ZFC set theory.
> >>`Unprovable' describes the situation better.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Thank you and all who answered me!
> >
> >By the way, what textbook (or article) contains that result?
> >
> >
> >
> Try Kunen's  Set Theory.
> It's one of the better set theory texts around (IMHO).
> KP
>
> --
> E-MAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED],TUDelft,NL       PAPER: Faculty EWI
> PHONE:  +31-15-2784572                       TU Delft
> FAX:    +31-15-2786178                       Postbus 5031
> URL:    http://aw.twi.tudelft.nl/~hart       2600 GA  Delft
>                                              the Netherlands
>
>