Weak square bracket relations for Pκ(λ)

2008 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 729-751
Author(s):  
Pierre Matet

AbstractWe study the partition relation that is a weakening of the usual partition relation . Our main result asserts that if κ is an uncountable strongly compact cardinal and , then does not hold.

2014 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 1092-1119 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILL BONEY

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. 301-319
Author(s):  
STAMATIS DIMOPOULOS

AbstractWoodin and Vopěnka cardinals are established notions in the large cardinal hierarchy and it is known that Vopěnka cardinals are the Woodin analogue for supercompactness. Here we give the definition of Woodin for strong compactness cardinals, the Woodinised version of strong compactness, and we prove an analogue of Magidor’s identity crisis theorem for the first strongly compact cardinal.


1979 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 563-565
Author(s):  
Carl F. Morgenstern

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.


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.


1980 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur W. Apter

1998 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 1404-1412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur W. Apter ◽  
Moti Gitik

AbstractWe show the consistency, relative to a supercompact cardinal, of the least measurable cardinal being both strongly compact and fully Laver indestructible. We also show the consistency, relative to a supercompact cardinal, of the least strongly compact cardinal being somewhat supercompact yet not completely supercompact and having both its strong compactness and degree of supercompactness fully Laver indestructible.


2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-89
Author(s):  
James W. Cummings

2006 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 1342-1352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albin L. Jones

AbstractWe show that if κ is a weakly compact cardinal, thenfor any ordinals α < κ+ and μ < κ, and any finite ordinals m and n. This polarized partition relation represents the statement that for any partitionof κ × κ+ into m + μ pieces either there are A ∈ [κ]κ, B ∈ [κ]+]α and i < m with A × B ⊆ Ki or there are C ∈ [κ]κ, , and j < μ with C × D ⊆ Lj. Related results for measurable and almost measurable κ are also investigated. Our proofs of these relations involve the use of elementary substructures of set models of large fragments of ZFC.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document