Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:17:42.969Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An AD-like model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Arthur W. Apter
Arthur W. Apter*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey 07102
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A very fruitful line of research in recent years has been the application of techniques in large cardinals and forcing to the production of models in which certain consequences of the axiom of determinateness (AD) are true or in which certain “AD-like” consequences are true. Numerous results have been published on this subject, among them the papers of Bull and Kleinberg [4], Bull [3], Woodin [15], Mitchell [11], and [1], [2].

Another such model will be constructed in this paper. Specifically, the following theorem is proven.

Theorem 1. Con(ZFC + There are cardinals κ < δ < λ so that κ is a supercompact limit of supercompact cardinals, λ is a measurable cardinal, and δ is λ supercompact) ⇒ Con(ZF + ℵ1 and ℵ2 are Ramsey cardinals + The ℵn for 3 ≤ n ≤ ω are singular cardinals of cofinality ω each of which carries a Rowbottom filter + ℵω + 1 is a Ramsey cardinal + ℵω + 2 is a measurable cardinal).

It is well known that under AD + DC, ℵ2 and ℵ2 are measurable cardinals, the ℵn for 3 ≤ n < ω are singular Jonsson cardinals of cofinality ℵ2, ℵω is a Rowbottom cardinal, and ℵω + 1 and ℵω + 2 are measurable cardinals.

The proof of the above theorem will use the existence of normal ultrafilters which satisfy a certain property (*) (to be defined later) and an automorphism argument which draws upon the techniques developed in [9], [2], and [4] but which shows in addition that certain supercompact Prikry partial orderings are in a strong sense “homogeneous”. Before beginning the proof of the theorem, however, we briefly mention some preliminaries.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , June 1985 , pp. 531 - 543
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Apter, A., Some results on consecutive large cardinals, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 25 (1983), pp. 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Apter, A., Successors of singular cardinals and measurability, Advances in Mathematics (to appear).Google Scholar
[3]Bull, E., Successive large cardinals, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 15 (1978), pp. 161–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Bull, E. and Kleinberg, E., A consistent consequence of AD, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 247 (1979), pp. 211–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Kanamori, A. and Magidor, M., The evolution of large cardinal axioms in set theory, Higher set theory (Oberwolfach, 1977), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 669, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978, pp. 99–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Kunen, K. and Paris, J., Boolean extensions and measurable cardinals, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 2 (1971), pp. 359–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Laver, R., Making the supercompactness of κ indestructible under κ directed closed forcing, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 29 (1978), pp. 385–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Lévy, A. and Solovay, R., Measurable cardinals and the continuum hypothesis, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 5 (1967), pp. 234–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Magidor, M., On the singular cardinals problem. I, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 28 (1977), pp. 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Menas, T., A combinatorial property of Pκ(λ), this Journal, vol. 41 (1976), pp. 225–233.Google Scholar
[11]Mitchell, W., How weak is a closed unbounded filter?(to appear).Google Scholar
[12]Prikry, K., Changing measurable into accessible cardinals, Dissertationes Mathematicae, vol. 68 (1970).Google Scholar
[13]Rowbottom, F., Some strong axioms of infinity incompatible with the axiom of constructibility, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 3 (1971), pp. 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Solovay, R., Reinhardt, W. and Kanamori, A., Strong axioms of infinity and elementary embeddings, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 13 (1978), pp. 73–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Woodin, H. (to appear).Google Scholar