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

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.

2009 ◽  
Vol 09 (01) ◽  
pp. 139-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
ITAY NEEMAN

The tree property at κ+ states that there are no Aronszajn trees on κ+, or, equivalently, that every κ+ tree has a cofinal branch. For singular strong limit cardinals κ, there is tension between the tree property at κ+ and failure of the singular cardinal hypothesis at κ; the former is typically the result of the presence of strongly compact cardinals in the background, and the latter is impossible above strongly compacts. In this paper, we reconcile the two. We prove from large cardinals that the tree property at κ+ is consistent with failure of the singular cardinal hypothesis at κ.


2010 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 1383-1402 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Cummings ◽  
Matthew Foreman

§1. Introduction. It is a well-known phenomenon in set theory that problems in infinite combinatorics involving singular cardinals and their successors tend to be harder than the parallel problems for regular cardinals. Examples include the behaviour of cardinal exponentiation, the extent of the tree property, the extent of stationary reflection, and the existence of non-free almost-free abelian groups. The explanation for this phenomenon lies in inner model theory, in particular core models and covering lemmas. If W is an inner model of V then1. W strongly covers V if every uncountable set of ordinals is covered by a set of the same V -cardinality lying in W.2. W weakly covers V if W computes the successor of every V-singular cardinal correctly.Strong covering implies weak covering.In inner model theory there are many theorems of the general form “if there is no inner model of large cardinal hypothesis X then there is an L-like inner model Kx which Y covers V”. Here the L-like properties of Kx always include GCH and Global Square. Examples include1. X is “0# exists”, Kx is L, Y is “strongly”.2. X is “there is a measurable cardinal”, Kx is the Dodd-Jensen core model, Y is “strongly”.3. X is “there is a Woodin cardinal”, Kx is the core model for a Woodin cardinal, Y is “weakly”.


2018 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 669-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
DIMA SINAPOVA ◽  
SPENCER UNGER

AbstractWe show that from large cardinals it is consistent to have the tree property simultaneously at${\aleph _{{\omega ^2} + 1}}$and${\aleph _{{\omega ^2} + 2}}$with${\aleph _{{\omega ^2}}}$strong limit.


2008 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-113
Author(s):  
Matteo Viale

The purpose of this communication is to present some recent advances on the consequences that forcing axioms and large cardinals have on the combinatorics of singular cardinals. I will introduce a few examples of problems in singular cardinal combinatorics which can be fruitfully attacked using ideas and techniques coming from the theory of forcing axioms and then translate the results so obtained in suitable large cardinals properties.The first example I will treat is the proof that the proper forcing axiom PFA implies the singular cardinal hypothesis SCH, this will easily lead to a new proof of Solovay's theorem that SCH holds above a strongly compact cardinal. I will also outline how some of the ideas involved in these proofs can be used as means to evaluate the “saturation” properties of models of strong forcing axioms like MM or PFA.The second example aims to show that the transfer principle (ℵω+1, ℵω) ↠ (ℵ2, ℵ1) fails assuming Martin's Maximum MM. Also in this case the result can be translated in a large cardinal property, however this requires a familiarity with a rather large fragment of Shelah's pcf-theory.Only sketchy arguments will be given, the reader is referred to the forthcoming [25] and [38] for a thorough analysis of these problems and for detailed proofs.


2009 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 1015-1046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunter Fuchs

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.


2021 ◽  
pp. 2150019
Author(s):  
Alejandro Poveda ◽  
Assaf Rinot ◽  
Dima Sinapova

In Part I of this series [5], we introduced a class of notions of forcing which we call [Formula: see text]-Prikry, and showed that many of the known Prikry-type notions of forcing that centers around singular cardinals of countable cofinality are [Formula: see text]-Prikry. We proved that given a [Formula: see text]-Prikry poset [Formula: see text] and a [Formula: see text]-name for a nonreflecting stationary set [Formula: see text], there exists a corresponding [Formula: see text]-Prikry poset that projects to [Formula: see text] and kills the stationarity of [Formula: see text]. In this paper, we develop a general scheme for iterating [Formula: see text]-Prikry posets, as well as verify that the Extender-based Prikry forcing is [Formula: see text]-Prikry. As an application, we blow-up the power of a countable limit of Laver-indestructible supercompact cardinals, and then iteratively kill all nonreflecting stationary subsets of its successor. This yields a model in which the singular cardinal hypothesis fails and simultaneous reflection of finite families of stationary sets holds.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (03) ◽  
pp. 283-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOAN BAGARIA ◽  
PETER KOELLNER ◽  
W. HUGH WOODIN

AbstractThe HOD Dichotomy Theorem states that if there is an extendible cardinal, δ, then either HOD is “close” to V (in the sense that it correctly computes successors of singular cardinals greater than δ) or HOD is “far” from V (in the sense that all regular cardinals greater than or equal to δ are measurable in HOD). The question is whether the future will lead to the first or the second side of the dichotomy. Is HOD “close” to V, or “far” from V? There is a program aimed at establishing the first alternative—the “close” side of the HOD Dichotomy. This is the program of inner model theory. In recent years the third author has provided evidence that there is an ultimate inner model—Ultimate-L—and he has isolated a natural conjecture associated with the model—the Ultimate-L Conjecture. This conjecture implies that (assuming the existence of an extendible cardinal) that the first alternative holds—HOD is “close” to V. This is the future in which pattern prevails. In this paper we introduce a very different program, one aimed at establishing the second alternative—the “far” side of the HOD Dichotomy. This is the program of large cardinals beyond choice. Kunen famously showed that if AC holds then there cannot be a Reinhardt cardinal. It has remained open whether Reinhardt cardinals are consistent in ZF alone. It turns out that there is an entire hierarchy of choiceless large cardinals of which Reinhardt cardinals are only the beginning, and, surprisingly, this hierarchy appears to be highly ordered and amenable to systematic investigation, as we shall show in this paper. The point is that if these choiceless large cardinals are consistent then the Ultimate-L Conjecture must fail. This is the future where chaos prevails.


2003 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirna Džamonja ◽  
Saharon Shelah

AbstractThe paper is concerned with the existence of a universal graph at the successor of a strong limit singular μ of cofinality ℵ0. Starting from the assumption of the existence of a supercompact cardinal, a model is built in which for some such μ there are μ++ graphs on μ+ that taken jointly are universal for the graphs on μ+, while .The paper also addresses the general problem of obtaining a framework for consistency results at the successor of a singular strong limit starting from the assumption that a supercompact cardinal κ exists. The result on the existence of universal graphs is obtained as a specific application of a more general method.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Alejandro Poveda ◽  
Assaf Rinot ◽  
Dima Sinapova

Abstract We introduce a class of notions of forcing which we call $\Sigma $ -Prikry, and show that many of the known Prikry-type notions of forcing that centers around singular cardinals of countable cofinality are $\Sigma $ -Prikry. We show that given a $\Sigma $ -Prikry poset $\mathbb P$ and a name for a non-reflecting stationary set T, there exists a corresponding $\Sigma $ -Prikry poset that projects to $\mathbb P$ and kills the stationarity of T. Then, in a sequel to this paper, we develop an iteration scheme for $\Sigma $ -Prikry posets. Putting the two works together, we obtain a proof of the following. Theorem. If $\kappa $ is the limit of a countable increasing sequence of supercompact cardinals, then there exists a forcing extension in which $\kappa $ remains a strong limit cardinal, every finite collection of stationary subsets of $\kappa ^+$ reflects simultaneously, and $2^\kappa =\kappa ^{++}$ .


1996 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Hjorth

§0. Preface. There has been an expectation that the endgame of the more tenacious problems raised by the Los Angeles ‘cabal’ school of descriptive set theory in the 1970's should ultimately be played out with the use of inner model theory. Questions phrased in the language of descriptive set theory, where both the conclusions and the assumptions are couched in terms that only mention simply definable sets of reals, and which have proved resistant to purely descriptive set theoretic arguments, may at last find their solution through the connection between determinacy and large cardinals.Perhaps the most striking example was given by [24], where the core model theory was used to analyze the structure of HOD and then show that all regular cardinals below ΘL(ℝ) are measurable. John Steel's analysis also settled a number of structural questions regarding HODL(ℝ), such as GCH.Another illustration is provided by [21]. There an application of large cardinals and inner model theory is used to generalize the Harrington-Martin theorem that determinacy implies )determinacy.However, it is harder to find examples of theorems regarding the structure of the projective sets whose only known proof from determinacy assumptions uses the link between determinacy and large cardinals. We may equivalently ask whether there are second order statements of number theory that cannot be proved under PD–the axiom of projective determinacy–without appealing to the large cardinal consequences of the PD, such as the existence of certain kinds of inner models that contain given types of large cardinals.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document