The ⊲-ordering on normal ultrafilters

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 936-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
The Other ◽  
Ground Model ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Normal Measure ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Normal Ultrafilter

If κ is a measurable cardinal, then it is a well-known fact that there is at least one normal ultrafilter over κ. In [K-1], Kunen showed that one cannot say more without further assumptions, for if U is a normal ultrafilter over κ, then L[U] is an inner model of ZFC in which κ has exactly one normal measure. On the other hand, Kunen and Paris showed [K-P] that if κ is measurable in the ground model, then there is a forcing extension in which κ has normal ultrafilters, so it is consistent that κ has the maximum possible number of normal ultrafilters. Starting with assumptions stronger than measurability, Mitchell [Mi-1] filled in the gap by constructing models of ZFC + GCH satisfying “there are exactly λ normal ultrafilters over κ”, where λ could be κ+ or κ++ (measured in the model), or anything ≤ κ. Whether or not Mitchell's results can be obtained by starting only with a measurable cardinal in the ground model and defining a forcing extension is unknown.There are substantial differences between the Mitchell models and the Kunen-Paris models. In the Kunen-Paris models κ can be the only measurable cardinal. However, in the Mitchell model in which κ has exactly 2 normal ultrafilters, one of them contains the set {α < κ: α is measurable} while the other does not. Thus it is natural to ask if it is possible to get a model M of ZFC in which κ is the only measurable cardinal and κ has exactly 2 normal ultrafilters. In this paper we will show that, using appropriate large cardinal assumptions, the answer is yes.

On the relationship between the partition property and the weak partition property for normal ultrafilters on Pκλ

1993 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-127
Author(s):  
Julius B. Barbanel
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
The Other ◽  
Supercompact Cardinal ◽  
Partition Property ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The One ◽  
Measurable Cardinals ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Normal Ultrafilter

AbstractSuppose κ is a supercompact cardinal and λ > κ. We study the relationship between the partition properly and the weak partition properly for normal ultrafilters on Pκλ. On the one hand, we show that the following statement is consistent, given an appropriate large cardinal assumption: The partition property and the weak partition properly are equivalent, there are many normal ultrafilters that satisfy these properties, and there are many normal ultrafilters that do not satisfy these properties. On the other hand, we consider the assumption that, for some λ > κ, there exists a normal ultrafilter U on Pκλ such that U satisfies the weak partition property but does not satisfy the partition property. We show that this assumption is implied by the assertion that there exists a cardinal γ > κ such that γ is γ+-supercompact, and, assuming the GCH, it implies the assertion that there exists a cardinal γ > κ such that γ is a measurable cardinal with a normal ultrafilter concentrating on measurable cardinals.

On P-points over a measurable cardinal

1981 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
A. Kanamori
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Elementary Embedding ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Measurable Cardinals ◽  
The Universe

This paper continues the study of κ-ultrafilters over a measurable cardinal κ, following the sequence of papers Ketonen [2], Kanamori [1] and Menas [4]. Much of the concern will be with p-point κ-ultrafilters, which have become a focus of attention because they epitomize situations of further complexity beyond the better understood cases, normal and product κ-ultrafilters.For any κ-ultrafilter D, let iD: V → MD ≃ Vκ/D be the elementary embedding of the universe into the transitization of the ultrapower by D. Situations of U < RKD will be exhibited when iU(κ) < iD(κ), and when iU(κ) = iD(κ). The main result will then be that if the latter case obtains, then there is an inner model with two measurable cardinals. (As will be pointed out, this formulation is due to Kunen, and improves on an earlier version of the author.) Incidentally, a similar conclusion will also follow from the assertion that there is an ascending Rudin-Keisler chain of κ-ultrafilters of length ω + 1. The interest in these results lies in the derivability of a substantial large cardinal assertion from plausible hypotheses on κ-ultrafilters.

scholarly journals On closed unbounded sets consisting of former regulars

1999 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moti Gitik
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand

AbstractA method of iteration of Prikry type forcing notions as well as a forcing for adding clubs is presented. It is applied to construct a model with a measurable cardinal containing a club of former regulars, starting with ο(κ) = κ + 1. On the other hand, it is shown that the strength of above is at leastο(κ) = κ.

Weak partition relations and measurability

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-38
Author(s):  
Mitchell Spector
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Order Type ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Partition Relation ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Partition Relations ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Increasing Function ◽  
Natural Way

The concept of "partition relation" has proven to be extremely important in the development of the theory of large cardinals. This is due in good part to the fact that the ordinal numbers which appear as parameters in partition relations provide a natural way to define a detailed hierarchy of the corresponding large cardinal axioms. In particular, the study of cardinals satisfying Ramsey-Erdös-style partition relations has yielded a great number of very interesting large cardinal axioms which lie in strength strictly between inaccessibility and measurability. It is the purpose of this paper to show that this phenomenon does not occur if we use infinite exponent partition relations; no such partition relation has consistency strength strictly between inaccessibility and measurability. We also give a complete determination of which infinite exponent partition relations hold, assuming that there is no inner model of set theory with a measurable cardinal.Our notation is standard. If F is a function and x is a set, then F″x denotes the range of F on x. If X is a set of ordinals and α is an ordinal, then [X]α is the collection of all subsets of X of order type α. We identify a member of [X]α with a strictly increasing function from α to X. If p ∈ [X]α and q ∈ [α]β, then the composition of p with q, which we denote pq, is a member of [X]β.

On the ultrafilters and ultrapowers of strong partition cardinals

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1268-1272
Author(s):  
J.M. Henle ◽  
E.M. Kleinberg ◽  
R.J. Watro
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Partition Property ◽  
Axiom Of Determinacy ◽  
Almost Everywhere ◽  
Normal Measure ◽  
Constructible Sets ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
The Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Strong Partition Cardinals

A strong partition cardinal is an uncountable well-ordered cardinal κ such that every partition of [κ]κ (the size κ subsets of κ) into less than κ many pieces has a homogeneous set of size κ. The existence of such cardinals is inconsistent with the axiom of choice, and our work concerning them is carried out in ZF set theory with just dependent choice (DC). The consistency of strong partition cardinals with this weaker theory remains an open question. The axiom of determinacy (AD) implies that a large number of cardinals including ℵ1 have the strong partition property. The hypothesis that AD holds in the inner model of constructible sets built over the real numbers as urelements has important consequences for descriptive set theory, and results concerning strong partition cardinals are often applied in this context. Kechris [4] and Kechris et al. [5] contain further information concerning the relationship between AD and strong partition cardinals.We assume familiarity with the basic results on strong partition cardinals as developed in Kleinberg [6], [7], [8] and Henle [2]. Recall that a strong partition cardinal κ is measurable; in fact every stationary subset of κ is measure one under some normal measure on κ. If μ is a countably additive ultrafilter extending the closed unbounded filter on κ, then the length of the ultrapower [κ]κ under the less than almost everywhere μ ordering is again a measurable cardinal. In §1 below we establish a polarized partition property on these measurable cardinals.

Proper Forcing and Remarkable Cardinals

2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralf-Dieter Schindler
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Exact Formulation ◽  
Axiom Of Determinacy ◽  
Slow Pace ◽  
Woodin Cardinals ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Proper Forcing ◽  
Remarkable Cardinals ◽  
The Universe

The present paper investigates the power of proper forcings to change the shape of the universe, in a certain well-defined respect. It turns out that the ranking among large cardinals can be used as a measure for that power. However, in order to establish the final result I had to isolate a new large cardinal concept, which I dubbed “remarkability.” Let us approach the exact formulation of the problem—and of its solution—at a slow pace.Breathtaking developments in the mid 1980s found one of its culminations in the theorem, due to Martin, Steel, and Woodin, that the existence of infinitely many Woodin cardinals with a measurable cardinal above them all implies that AD, the axiom of determinacy, holds in the least inner model containing all the reals, L(ℝ) (cf. [6[, p. 91). One of the nice things about AD is that the theory ZF + AD + V = L(ℝ) appears as a choiceless “completion” of ZF in that any interesting question (in particular, about sets of reals) seems to find an at least attractive answer in that theory (cf., for example, [5] Chap. 6). (Compare with ZF + V = L!) Beyond that, AD is very canonical as may be illustrated as follows.Let us say that L(ℝ) is absolute for set-sized forcings if for all posets P ∈ V, for all formulae ϕ, and for all ∈ ℝ do we have thatwhere is a name for the set of reals in the extension.

The consistency strength of the free-subset property for ωω

1984 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1198-1204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Koepke
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Core Model ◽  
Reverse Direction ◽  
Ground Model ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
The Core ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Free Subset ◽  
Coherent Sequence ◽  
Measurable Cardinals

A subset X of a structure S is called free in S if ∀x ∈ Xx ∉ S[X − {x}]; here, S[Y] is the substructure of S generated from Y by the functions of S. For κ, λ, μ cardinals, let Frμ(κ, λ) be the assertion:for every structure S with κ ⊂ S which has at most μ functions and relations there is a subset X ⊂ κ free in S of cardinality ≥ λ.We show that Frω(ωω, ω), the free-subset property for ωω, is equiconsistent with the existence of a measurable cardinal (2.2,4.4). This answers a question of Devlin [De].In the first section of this paper we prove some combinatorial facts about Frμ(κ, λ); in particular the first cardinal κ such that Frω(κ, ω) is weakly inaccessible or of cofinality ω (1.2). The second section shows that, under Frω(ωω, ω), ωω is measurable in an inner model. For the convenience of readers not acquainted with the core model κ, we first deduce the existence of 0# (2.1) using the inner model L. Then we adapt the proof to the core model and obtain that ωω is measurable in an inner model. For the reverse direction, we essentially apply a construction of Shelah [Sh] who forced Frω(ωω, ω) over a ground model which contains an ω-sequence of measurable cardinals. We show in §4 that indeed a coherent sequence of Ramsey cardinals suffices. In §3 we obtain such a sequence as an endsegment of a Prikry sequence.

Co-critical points of elementary embeddings

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 220-226
Author(s):  
Michael Sheard
Keyword(s):  
Critical Point ◽  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Elementary Embedding ◽  
Proper Class ◽  
Ground Model ◽  
Target Model ◽  
Inner Models ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Elementary Embeddings

Probably the two most famous examples of elementary embeddings between inner models of set theory are the embeddings of the universe into an inner model given by a measurable cardinal and the embeddings of the constructible universeLinto itself given by 0#. In both of these examples, the “target model” is a subclass of the “ground model” (and in the latter case they are equal). It is not hard to find examples of embeddings in which the target model is not a subclass of the ground model: ifis a generic ultrafilter arising from forcing with a precipitous ideal on a successor cardinalκ, then the ultraproduct of the ground model viacollapsesκ. Such considerations suggest a classification of how close the target model comes to “fitting inside” the ground model.Definition 1.1. LetMandNbe inner models (transitive, proper class models) of ZFC, and letj:M→Nbe an elementary embedding. Theco-critical pointofjis the least ordinalλ, if any exist, such that there isX⊆λ, X∈NbutX∉M. Such anXis called anew subsetofλ.It is easy to see that the co-critical point ofj:M→Nis a cardinal inN.

Ramsey cardinals, α-Erdös cardinals, and the core model

1991 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-114
Author(s):  
Dirk R. H. Schlingmann
Keyword(s):  
Measurable Cardinal ◽  
Core Model ◽  
The Core ◽  
Transitive Model ◽  
Normal Measure ◽  
Inner Model

The core model K was introduced by R. B. Jensen and A. J. Dodd [DoJ]. K is the union of Gödel's constructible universe L together with all mice, i.e., , and K is a transitive model of ZFC + (V = K) + GCH (see [DoJ]). V = K is consistent with the existence of Ramsey cardinals [M], and if cf(α) > ω, V = K is consistent with the existence of α-Erdös cardinals [J]. Let K be Ramsey. Then there is a smallest inner model Wκ of ZFC in which κ is Ramsey. We have Wκ ⊨ V = K and Wκ ⊆ K [M]. The existence of Wκ with is equivalent to the existence of a sharplike mouse on N ⊨ K with N ⊨ κ Ramsey. (A mouse N on is called sharplike provided .) We have , where is the mouse iteration of N. N is the oleast mouse not in Wκ (see [J] and [DJKo]). Here < denotes the mouse order. The context always clarifies whether the mouse order or the usual <-relation is meant.The main result of §1 is that Wκ ⊨ κ is the only Ramsey cardinal. A similar result has been found true in the smallest inner model L[U] of ZFC + “κ is measurable” if U is a normal measure on κ: L[U] ⊨ κ is the only measurable cardinal [Ku].

The κ-closed unbounded filter and supercpmpact cardinals

1981 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Mitchell Spector
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Time Period ◽  
The One ◽  
The Universe

The consistency of the Axiom of Determinateness (AD) poses a somewhat problematic question for set theorists. On the one hand, many mathematicians have studied AD, and none has yet derived a contradiction. Moreover, the consequences of AD which have been proven form an extensive and beautiful theory. (See [5] and [6], for example.) On the other hand, many extremely weird propositions follow from AD; these results indicate that AD is not an axiom which we can justify as intuitively true, a priori or by reason of its consequences, and we thus cannot add it to our set theory (as an accepted axiom, evidently true in the cumulative hierarchy of sets). Moreover, these results place doubt on the very consistency of AD. The failure of set theorists to show AD inconsistent over as short a time period as fifteen years can only be regarded as inconclusive, although encouraging, evidence.On the contrary, there is a great deal of rather convincing evidence that the existence of various large cardinals is not only consistent but actually true in the universe of all sets. Thus it becomes of interest to see which consequences of AD can be proven consistent relative to the consistency of ZFC + the existence of some large cardinal. Earlier theorems with this motivation are those of Bull and Kleinberg [2] and Spector ([14]; see also [12], [13]).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document