Proper forcing and L(ℝ)

2001 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 801-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Itay Neeman ◽  
Jindřich Zapletal
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Woodin Cardinals ◽  
Proper Forcing

AbstractWe present two ways in which the model L(ℝ) is canonical assuming the existence of large cardinals. We show that the theory of this model, with ordinal parameters, cannot be changed by small forcing: we show further that a set of ordinals in V cannot be added to L(ℝ) by small forcing. The large cardinal needed corresponds to the consistency strength of ADL(ℝ): roughly ω Woodin cardinals.

scholarly journals Ramsey-like cardinals II

2011 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 541-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Gitman ◽  
P. D. Welch
Keyword(s):  
Upper Bound ◽  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Core Model ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
The Core ◽  
Countable Ordinal ◽  
Elementary Embeddings ◽  
Remarkable Cardinals

AbstractThis paper continues the study of the Ramsey-like large cardinals introduced in [5] and [14]. Ramsey-like cardinals are defined by generalizing the characterization of Ramsey cardinals via the existence of elementary embeddings. Ultrafilters derived from such embeddings are fully iterable and so it is natural to ask about large cardinal notions asserting the existence of ultrafilters allowing only α-many iterations for some countable ordinal α. Here we study such α-iterable cardinals. We show that the α-iterable cardinals form a strict hierarchy for α ≤ ω1, that they are downward absolute to L for , and that the consistency strength of Schindler's remarkable cardinals is strictly between 1-iterable and 2-iterable cardinals.We show that the strongly Ramsey and super Ramsey cardinals from [5] are downward absolute to the core model K. Finally, we use a forcing argument from a strongly Ramsey cardinal to separate the notions of Ramsey and virtually Ramsey cardinals. These were introduced in [14] as an upper bound on the consistency strength of the Intermediate Chang's Conjecture.

Strongly unfoldable cardinals made indestructible

2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 1215-1248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas A. Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Proper Forcing ◽  
Class Forcing

AbstractI provide indestructibility results for large cardinals consistent with V = L, such as weakly compact, indescribable and strongly unfoldable cardinals. The Main Theorem shows that any strongly unfoldable cardinal κ can be made indestructible by <κ-closed, κ-proper forcing. This class of posets includes for instance all <κ-closed posets that are either κ−-c.c. or <κ-strategically closed as well as finite iterations of such posets. Since strongly unfoldable cardinals strengthen both indescribable and weakly compact cardinals, the Main Theorem therefore makes these two large cardinal notions similarly indestructible. Finally. I apply the Main Theorem to obtain a class forcing extension preserving all strongly unfoldable cardinals in which every strongly unfoldable cardinal κ is indestructible by <κ-closed, κ-proper forcing.

scholarly journals Combined Maximality Principles up to large cardinals

2009 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 1015-1046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunter Fuchs
Keyword(s):  
Regular Cardinal ◽  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Regular Cardinals ◽  
Maximality Principles

AbstractThe motivation for this paper is the following: In [4] I showed that it is inconsistent with ZFC that the Maximality Principle for directed closed forcings holds at unboundedly many regular cardinals κ (even only allowing κ itself as a parameter in the Maximality Principle for <κ-closed forcings each time). So the question is whether it is consistent to have this principle at unboundedly many regular cardinals or at every regular cardinal below some large cardinal κ (instead of ∞), and if so, how strong it is. It turns out that it is consistent in many cases, but the consistency strength is quite high.

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.

Between strong and superstrong

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 547-559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
Critical Point ◽  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Elementary Embedding ◽  
Proper Class ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Strong Cardinal ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Strong Cardinals

Definition. A cardinal κ is strong iff for every x there is an elementary embedding j:V → M with critical point κ such that x ∈ M.κ is superstrong iff ∃j:V → M with critical point κ such that Vj(κ) ∈ M.These definitions are natural weakenings of supercompactness and hugeness respectively and display some of the same relations. For example, if κ is superstrong then Vκ ⊨ “∃ proper class of strong cardinals”, but the smallest superstrong cardinal is less than the smallest strong cardinal (if both types exist). (See [SRK] and [Mo] for the arguments involving supercompact and huge, which translate routinely to strong and superstrong.)Given any two types of large cardinals, a typical vague question which is often asked is “How large is the gap in consistency strength?” In one sense the gap might be considered relatively small, since the “higher degree” strong cardinals described below (a standard trick that is nearly always available) and the Shelah and Woodin hierarchies of cardinals (see [St] for a definition of these) seem to be (at least at this point in time) the only “natural” large cardinal properties lying between strong cardinals and superstrong cardinals in consistency strength.

Large cardinal structures below ℵω

1986 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 591-603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur W. Apter ◽  
James M. Henle
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Weak Consistency ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Supercompact Cardinals ◽  
Axiom Of Determinacy ◽  
Normal Measure ◽  
The Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Measurable Cardinals

The theory of large cardinals in the absence of the axiom of choice (AC) has been examined extensively by set theorists. A particular motivation has been the study of large cardinals and their interrelationships with the axiom of determinacy (AD). Many important and beautiful theorems have been proven in this area, especially by Woodin, who has shown how to obtain, from hypermeasurability, models for the theories “ZF + DC + ∀α < ℵ1(ℵ1 → (ℵ1)α)” and . Thus, consequences of AD whose consistency strength appeared to be beyond that of the more standard large cardinal hypotheses were shown to have suprisingly weak consistency strength.In this paper, we continue the study of large cardinals in the absence of AC and their interrelationships with AD by examining what large cardinal structures are possible on cardinals below ℵω in the absence of AC. Specifically, we prove the following theorems.Theorem 1. Con(ZFC + κ1 < κ2are supercompact cardinals) ⇒ Con(ZF + DC + The club filter on ℵ1is a normal measure + ℵ1and ℵ2are supercompact cardinals).Theorem 2. Con(ZF + AD) ⇒ Con(ZF + ℵ1, ℵ2and ℵ3are measurable cardinals which carry normal measures + μωis not a measure on any of these cardinals).

scholarly journals Contributions to the Theory of Large Cardinals through the Method of Forcing

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-222
Author(s):  
Alejandro Poveda
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Supercompact Cardinal ◽  
Singular Cardinal ◽  
Strong Limit ◽  
Tree Property ◽  
Prikry Forcing ◽  
Regular Cardinals ◽  
Singular Cardinals ◽  
Vopěnka’S Principle

AbstractThe dissertation under comment is a contribution to the area of Set Theory concerned with the interactions between the method of Forcing and the so-called Large Cardinal axioms.The dissertation is divided into two thematic blocks. In Block I we analyze the large-cardinal hierarchy between the first supercompact cardinal and Vopěnka’s Principle (Part I). In turn, Block II is devoted to the investigation of some problems arising from Singular Cardinal Combinatorics (Part II and Part III).We commence Part I by investigating the Identity Crisis phenomenon in the region comprised between the first supercompact cardinal and Vopěnka’s Principle. As a result, we generalize Magidor’s classical theorems [2] to this higher region of the large-cardinal hierarchy. Also, our analysis allows to settle all the questions that were left open in [1]. Finally, we conclude Part I by presenting a general theory of preservation of $C^{(n)}$ -extendible cardinals under class forcing iterations. From this analysis we derive several applications. For instance, our arguments are used to show that an extendible cardinal is consistent with “ $(\lambda ^{+\omega })^{\mathrm {HOD}}<\lambda ^+$ , for every regular cardinal $\lambda $ .” In particular, if Woodin’s HOD Conjecture holds, and therefore it is provable in ZFC + “There exists an extendible cardinal” that above the first extendible cardinal every singular cardinal $\lambda $ is singular in HOD and $(\lambda ^+)^{\textrm {{HOD}}}=\lambda ^+$ , there may still be no agreement at all between V and HOD about successors of regular cardinals.In Part II and Part III we analyse the relationship between the Singular Cardinal Hypothesis (SCH) with other relevant combinatorial principles at the level of successors of singular cardinals. Two of these are the Tree Property and the Reflection of Stationary sets, which are central in Infinite Combinatorics.Specifically, Part II is devoted to prove the consistency of the Tree Property at both $\kappa ^+$ and $\kappa ^{++}$ , whenever $\kappa $ is a strong limit singular cardinal witnessing an arbitrary failure of the SCH. This generalizes the main result of [3] in two senses: it allows arbitrary cofinalities for $\kappa $ and arbitrary failures for the SCH.In the last part of the dissertation (Part III) we introduce the notion of $\Sigma $ -Prikry forcing. This new concept allows an abstract and uniform approach to the theory of Prikry-type forcings and encompasses several classical examples of Prikry-type forcing notions, such as the classical Prikry forcing, the Gitik-Sharon poset, or the Extender Based Prikry forcing, among many others.Our motivation in this part of the dissertation is to prove an iteration theorem at the level of the successor of a singular cardinal. Specifically, we aim for a theorem asserting that every $\kappa ^{++}$ -length iteration with support of size $\leq \kappa $ has the $\kappa ^{++}$ -cc, provided the iterates belong to a relevant class of $\kappa ^{++}$ -cc forcings. While there are a myriad of works on this vein for regular cardinals, this contrasts with the dearth of investigations in the parallel context of singular cardinals. Our main contribution is the proof that such a result is available whenever the class of forcings under consideration is the family of $\Sigma $ -Prikry forcings. Finally, and as an application, we prove that it is consistent—modulo large cardinals—the existence of a strong limit cardinal $\kappa $ with countable cofinality such that $\mathrm {SCH}_\kappa $ fails and every finite family of stationary subsets of $\kappa ^+$ reflects simultaneously.

scholarly journals TAMENESS FROM LARGE CARDINAL AXIOMS

2014 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 1092-1119 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILL BONEY
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Strongly Compact Cardinal ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Compact Cardinal ◽  
Dual Property ◽  
First Time ◽  
Strongly Compact Cardinals ◽  
Do So

AbstractWe show that Shelah’s Eventual Categoricity Conjecture for successors follows from the existence of class many strongly compact cardinals. This is the first time the consistency of this conjecture has been proven. We do so by showing that every AEC withLS(K) below a strongly compact cardinalκis <κ-tame and applying the categoricity transfer of Grossberg and VanDieren [11]. These techniques also apply to measurable and weakly compact cardinals and we prove similar tameness results under those hypotheses. We isolate a dual property to tameness, calledtype shortness, and show that it follows similarly from large cardinals.

Ramsey-like cardinals

2011 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 519-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Gitman
Keyword(s):  
Large Cardinals ◽  
Large Cardinal ◽  
Elementary Embedding ◽  
Large Fragment ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Elementary Embeddings ◽  
Measurable Cardinals

AbstractOne of the numerous characterizations of a Ramsey cardinal κ involves the existence of certain types of elementary embeddings for transitive sets of size κ satisfying a large fragment of ZFC. We introduce new large cardinal axioms generalizing the Ramsey elementary embeddings characterization and show that they form a natural hierarchy between weakly compact cardinals and measurable cardinals. These new axioms serve to further our knowledge about the elementary embedding properties of smaller large cardinals, in particular those still consistent with V = L.

scholarly journals THE CONSISTENCY STRENGTH OF LONG PROJECTIVE DETERMINACY

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 338-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
JUAN P. AGUILERA ◽  
SANDRA MÜLLER
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Consistency Strength ◽  
Axiom Of Determinacy ◽  
Woodin Cardinals ◽  
Inner Model ◽  
Image Position ◽  
Woodin Cardinal

AbstractWe determine the consistency strength of determinacy for projective games of length ω2. Our main theorem is that $\Pi _{n + 1}^1 $-determinacy for games of length ω2 implies the existence of a model of set theory with ω + n Woodin cardinals. In a first step, we show that this hypothesis implies that there is a countable set of reals A such that Mn (A), the canonical inner model for n Woodin cardinals constructed over A, satisfies $$A = R$$ and the Axiom of Determinacy. Then we argue how to obtain a model with ω + n Woodin cardinal from this.We also show how the proof can be adapted to investigate the consistency strength of determinacy for games of length ω2 with payoff in $^R R\Pi _1^1 $ or with σ-projective payoff.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document