Skip to main content
Log in

Indestructibility and destructible measurable cardinals

  • Published:
Archive for Mathematical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Say that \({\kappa}\)’s measurability is destructible if there exists a < \({\kappa}\)-closed forcing adding a new subset of \({\kappa}\) which destroys \({\kappa}\)’s measurability. For any δ, let λ δ =df The least beth fixed point above δ. Suppose that \({\kappa}\) is indestructibly supercompact and there is a measurable cardinal λ > \({\kappa}\). It then follows that \({A_{1} = \{\delta < \kappa \mid \delta}\) is measurable, δ is not a limit of measurable cardinals, δ is not δ + strongly compact, and δ’s measurability is destructible when forcing with partial orderings having rank below λ δ } is unbounded in \({\kappa}\). On the other hand, under the same hypotheses, \({A_{2} = \{\delta < \kappa \mid \delta}\) is measurable, δ is not a limit of measurable cardinals, δ is not δ + strongly compact, and δ′s measurability is indestructible when forcing with either Add(δ, 1) or Add(δ, δ +)} is unbounded in \({\kappa}\) as well. The large cardinal hypothesis on λ is necessary, as we further demonstrate by constructing via forcing two distinct models in which either \({A_{1} = \emptyset}\) or \({A_{2} = \emptyset}\). In each of these models, both of which have restricted large cardinal structures above \({\kappa}\), every measurable cardinal δ which is not a limit of measurable cardinals is δ + strongly compact, and there is an indestructibly supercompact cardinal \({\kappa}\). In the model in which \({A_{1} = \emptyset}\), every measurable cardinal δ which is not a limit of measurable cardinals is <λ δ strongly compact and has its <λ δ strong compactness (and hence also its measurability) indestructible when forcing with δ-directed closed partial orderings having rank below λ δ . The choice of the least beth fixed point above δ is arbitrary, and other values of λ δ are also possible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Apter A.: Indestructibility and level by level equivalence and inequivalence. Math. Log. Q. 53, 78–85 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Apter A.: Indestructibility and measurable cardinals with few and many measures. Arch. Math. Log. 47, 101–110 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Apter A.: Indestructibility and stationary reflection. Math. Log. Q. 55, 228–236 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Apter A.: Indestructibility, HOD, and the ground axiom. Math. Log. Q. 57, 261–265 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Apter A.: Indestructibility, instances of strong compactness, and level by level inequivalence. Arch. Math. Log. 49, 725–741 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Apter A.: Indestructibilty, measurability, and degrees of supercompactness. Math. Log. Q. 58, 75–82 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Apter A.: More Easton theorems for level by level equivalence. Colloq. Math. 128, 69–86 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Apter A.: Strong compactness, measurability, and the class of supercompact cardinals. Fundam. Math. 167, 65–78 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Apter A.: Universal partial indestructibility and strong compactness. Math. Log. Q. 51, 524–531 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Apter A., Cummings J.: Identity crises and strong compactness. J. Symb. Log. 65, 1895–1910 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Apter A., Gitik M.: The least measurable can be strongly compact and indestructible. J. Symb. Log. 63, 1404–1412 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Apter A., Hamkins J.D.: Indestructibility and the level-by-level agreement between strong compactness and supercompactness. J. Symb. Log. 67, 820–840 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Gitik M.: Changing cofinalities and the nonstationary ideal. Isr. J. Math. 56, 280–314 (1986)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Gitik M.: On measurable cardinals violating the continuum hypothesis. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 63, 227–240 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Gitik M.: The negation of the singular cardinal hypothesis from \({o(\kappa) = \kappa^{++}}\). Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 43, 209–234 (1989)

  16. Hamkins J.D.: Extensions with the approximation and cover properties have no new large cardinals. Fundam. Math. 180, 257–277 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Hamkins J.D.: Gap forcing. Isr. J. Math. 125, 237–252 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Hamkins J.D.: Gap forcing: generalizing the Lévy-Solovay theorem. Bull. Symb. Log. 5, 264–272 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Hamkins J.D.: The lottery preparation. Ann. Pure Appl. Log. 101, 103–146 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamkins J.D.: Small forcing makes any cardinal superdestructible. J. Symb. Log. 63, 51–58 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Jech T.: Set theory: The third millennium edition, revised and expanded. Springer, Berlin (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Laver R.: Making the supercompactness of \({\kappa}\) indestructible under \({\kappa}\)-directed closed forcing. Isr. J. Math. 29, 385–388 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Lévy A., Solovay R.: Measurable cardinals and the continuum hypothesis. Isr. J. Math. 5, 234–248 (1967)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Solovay, R.: Strongly compact cardinals and the GCH. In: Proceedings of the Tarski Symposium, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 25, pp. 365–372. American Mathematical Society, Providence (1974)

  25. Solovay R., Reinhardt W., Kanamori A.: Strong axioms of infinity and elementary embeddings. Ann. Math. Log. 13, 73–116 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur W. Apter.

Additional information

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Rich Laver, a friend and inspiration. It is truly a privilege to be able to contribute a paper to this volume in his honor.

The author’s research was partially supported by PSC-CUNY grants.

The author wishes to thank the referee for helpful comments and suggestions which have been incorporated into the current version of the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Apter, A.W. Indestructibility and destructible measurable cardinals. Arch. Math. Logic 55, 3–18 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-015-0470-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-015-0470-7

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation