Reflecting stationary sets

1982 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 755-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Menachem Magidor
Keyword(s):  
Initial Segment ◽  
Stationary Subset ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Supercompact Cardinals ◽  
Stationary Subsets ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

AbstractWe prove that the statement “For every pair A, B, stationary subsets of ω2, composed of points of cofinality ω, there exists an ordinal α such that both A ∩ α and B ∩ α are stationary subsets of α is equiconsistent with the existence of weakly compact cardinal. (This completes results of Baumgartner and Harrington and Shelah.)We also prove, assuming the existence of infinitely many supercompact cardinals, the statement “Every stationary subset of ωω+1 has a stationary initial segment.”

Stationary reflections for uncountable cofinality

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Péter Komjáth
Keyword(s):  
Partial Order ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Supercompact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Stationary Reflection ◽  
Supercompact Cardinals ◽  
Stationary Set ◽  
Compactness Theorems ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

It was J. E. Baumgartner who in [1] proved that when a weakly compact cardinal is Lévy-collapsed to ω2 the new ω2 inherits some of the large cardinal properties; e.g. if S is a stationary set of ω-limits in ω2 then for some α < ω2, S ∩ α is stationary in α. Later S. Shelah extended this to the following theorem: if a supercompact cardinal κ is Lévy-collapsed to ω2, then in the resulting model the following holds: if S ⊆ λ is a stationary set of ω-limits and cf(λ) ≥ ω2 then there is an α. < λ such that S ∩ α is stationary in α, i.e. stationary reflection holds for countable cofinality (see [1] and [3]). These theorems are important prototypes of small cardinal compactness theorems; many applications and generalizations can be found in the literature. One might think that these results are true for sets with an uncountable cofinality μ as well, i.e. when an appropriate large cardinal is collapsed to μ++. Though this is true for Baumgartner's theorem, there remains a problem with Shelah's result. The point is that the lemma stating that a stationary set of ω-limits remains stationary after forcing with an ω2-closed partial order may be false in the case of μ-limits in a cardinal of the form λ+ with cf(λ) < μ, as was shown in [8] by Shelah. The problem has recently been solved by Baumgartner, who observed that if a universal box-sequence on the class of those ordinals with cofinality ≤ μ exists, the lemma still holds, and a universal box-sequence of the above type can be added without destroying supercompact cardinals beyond μ.

scholarly journals The least weakly compact cardinal can be unfoldable, weakly measurable and nearly $${\theta}$$ θ -supercompact

2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 491-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent Cody ◽  
Moti Gitik ◽  
Joel David Hamkins ◽  
Jason A. Schanker
Keyword(s):  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

scholarly journals Simultaneously vanishing higher derived limits

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Bergfalk ◽  
Chris Lambie-Hanson
Keyword(s):  
Euclidean Space ◽  
Metric Spaces ◽  
Inverse System ◽  
Finite Support ◽  
Partial Functions ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Strong Homology ◽  
Finite Support Iteration ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

Abstract In 1988, Sibe Mardešić and Andrei Prasolov isolated an inverse system $\textbf {A}$ with the property that the additivity of strong homology on any class of spaces which includes the closed subsets of Euclidean space would entail that $\lim ^n\textbf {A}$ (the nth derived limit of $\textbf {A}$ ) vanishes for every $n>0$ . Since that time, the question of whether it is consistent with the $\mathsf {ZFC}$ axioms that $\lim ^n \textbf {A}=0$ for every $n>0$ has remained open. It remains possible as well that this condition in fact implies that strong homology is additive on the category of metric spaces. We show that assuming the existence of a weakly compact cardinal, it is indeed consistent with the $\mathsf {ZFC}$ axioms that $\lim ^n \textbf {A}=0$ for all $n>0$ . We show this via a finite-support iteration of Hechler forcings which is of weakly compact length. More precisely, we show that in any forcing extension by this iteration, a condition equivalent to $\lim ^n\textbf {A}=0$ will hold for each $n>0$ . This condition is of interest in its own right; namely, it is the triviality of every coherent n-dimensional family of certain specified sorts of partial functions $\mathbb {N}^2\to \mathbb {Z}$ which are indexed in turn by n-tuples of functions $f:\mathbb {N}\to \mathbb {N}$ . The triviality and coherence in question here generalise the classical and well-studied case of $n=1$ .

scholarly journals PROOF THEORY OF WEAK COMPACTNESS

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (01) ◽  
pp. 1350003 ◽  
Author(s):  
TOSHIYASU ARAI
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Proof Theory ◽  
Weak Compactness ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

We show that the existence of a weakly compact cardinal over the Zermelo–Fraenkel's set theory ZF is proof-theoretically reducible to iterations of Mostowski collapsings and Mahlo operations.

The monadic theory of ω2

1983 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuri Gurevich ◽  
Menachem Magidor ◽  
Saharon Shelah
Keyword(s):  
Order Theory ◽  
Second Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Monadic Theory ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

AbstractAssume ZFC + “There is a weakly compact cardinal” is consistent. Then:(i) For every S ⊆ ω, ZFC + “S and the monadic theory of ω2 are recursive each in the other” is consistent; and(ii) ZFC + “The full second-order theory of ω2 is interpretable in the monadic theory of ω2” is consistent.

Two weak consequences of 0#

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 597-603
Author(s):  
M. Gitik ◽  
M. Magidor ◽  
H. Woodin
Keyword(s):  
Limit Point ◽  
Inaccessible Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

AbstractIt is proven that the following statement:“there exists a club C ⊆ κ such that every α ∈ C is an inaccessible cardinal in L and, for every δ a limit point of C, C ∩ δ is almost contained in every club of δ of L”is equiconsistent with a weakly compact cardinal if δ = ℵ1, and with a weakly compact cardinal of order 1 if δ = ℵ2.

On the ordering of certain large cardinals

1979 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-565
Author(s):  
Carl F. Morgenstern
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Inaccessible Cardinal ◽  
Elementary Embedding ◽  
Strongly Compact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

It is well known that the first strongly inaccessible cardinal is strictly less than the first weakly compact cardinal which in turn is strictly less than the first Ramsey cardinal, etc. However, once one passes the first measurable cardinal the inequalities are no longer strict. Magidor [3] has shown that the first strongly compact cardinal may be equal to the first measurable cardinal or equal to the first super-compact cardinal (the first supercompact cardinal is strictly larger than the first measurable cardinal). In this note we will indicate how Magidor's methods can be used to show that it is undecidable whether one cardinal (the first strongly compact) is greater than or less than another large cardinal (the first huge cardinal). We assume that the reader is familiar with the ultrapower construction of Scott, as presented in Drake [1] or Kanamori, Reinhardt and Solovay [2].Definition. A cardinal κ is huge (or 1-huge) if there is an elementary embedding j of the universe V into a transitive class M such that M contains the ordinals, is closed under j(κ) sequences, j(κ) > κ and j ↾ Rκ = id. Let κ denote the first huge cardinal, and let λ = j(κ).One can see from easy reflection arguments that κ and λ are inaccessible in V and, in fact, that κ is measurable in V.

On the consistency of the Definable Tree Property on ℵ1

2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 1204-1214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Leshem
Keyword(s):  
Tree Property ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
First Order ◽  
Weakly Compact Cardinal

AbstractIn this paper we prove the equiconsistency of “Every ω1 –tree which is first order definable over (, ε) has a cofinal branch” with the existence of a reflecting cardinal. We also prove that the addition of MA to the definable tree property increases the consistency strength to that of a weakly compact cardinal. Finally we comment on the generalization to higher cardinals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document