We present several generalizations of the well-known Kunen inconsistency that there is no nontrivial elementary embedding from the set-theoretic universe V to itself. For example, there is no elementary embedding from the universe V to a set-forcing extension V[G], or conversely from V[G] to V, or more generally from one set-forcing ground model of the universe to another, or between any two models that are eventually stationary correct, or from V to HOD, or conversely from HOD to V, or indeed (...) from any definable class to V, among many other possibilities we consider, including generic embeddings, definable embeddings and results not requiring the axiom of choice. We have aimed in this article for a unified presentation that weaves together some previously known unpublished or folklore results, several due to Woodin and others, along with our new contributions. (shrink)

If we assume the axiom of choice, then every two cardinal numbers are comparable, In the absence of the axiom of choice, this is no longer so. For a few cardinalities related to an arbitrary infinite set, we will give all the possible relationships between them, where possible means that the relationship is consistent with the axioms of set theory. Further we investigate the relationships between some other cardinal numbers in specific permutation models and give some results provable without using (...) the axiom of choice. (shrink)

Assume ZFC + "There is a weakly compact cardinal" is consistent. Then: (i) For every $S \subseteq \omega, \mathrm{ZFC} +$ "S and the monadic theory of ω 2 are recursive each in the other" is consistent; and (ii) ZFC + "The full second-order theory of ω 2 is interpretable in the monadic theory of ω 2 " is consistent.

We present a downward Löwenheim-Skolem theorem which transfers downward formulas from L ∞,ω to L κ +, ω . The simplest instance is: Theorem 1. Let $\lambda > \kappa$ be infinite cardinals, and let L be a similarity type of cardinality κ at most. For every L-structure M of cardinality λ and every $X \subseteq M$ there exists a model $N \prec M$ containing the set X of power |X| · κ such that for every pair of finite sequences a, (...) b ∈ N $\langle N, \mathbf{a}\rangle \equiv_{\| N \|^+,\omega} \langle N, \mathbf{b}\rangle \Leftrightarrow \langle M, \mathbf{a}\rangle \equiv_{\infty,\omega} \langle M, \mathbf{b}\rangle.$ The following theorem is an application: Theorem 2. Let $\lambda , and suppose χ is a Ramsey cardinal greater than λ. If T has the (χ, L κ +, ω -unsuperstability property, then T has the (χ, L λ +, ω )-unsuperstability property. (shrink)

We show that if there is a nonconstructible real, then every perfect set has a nonconstructible element, answering a question of K. Prikry. This is a specific instance of a more general theorem giving a sufficient condition on a pair $M\subset N$ of models of set theory implying that every perfect set in N has an element in N which is not in M.

Let X be a set, and let $\hat{X} = \bigcup^\infty_{n = 0} X_n$ be the superstructure of X, where X 0 = X and X n + 1 = X n ∪ P(X n ) (P(X) is the power set of X) for n ∈ ω. The set X is called a flat set if and only if $X \neq \varnothing.\varnothing \not\in X.x \cap \hat X = \varnothing$ for each x ∈ X, and $x \cap \hat{y} = \varnothing$ for x.y (...) ∈ X such that x ≠ y, where $\hat{y} = \bigcup^\infty_{n = 0} y_n$ is the superstructure of y. In this article, it is shown that there exists a bijection of any nonempty set onto a flat set. Also, if W̃ is an ultrapower of X̂ (generated by any infinite set I and any nonprincipal ultrafilter on I), it is shown that W̃ is a nonstandard model of X: i.e., the Transfer Principle holds for X̂ and W̃, if X is a flat set. Indeed, it is obvious that W̃ is not a nonstandard model of X when X is an infinite ordinal number. The construction of flat sets only requires the ZF axioms of set theory. Therefore, the assumption that X is a set of individuals (i.e., $x \neq \varnothing$ and a ∈ x does not hold for x ∈ X and for any element a) is not needed for W̃ to be a nonstandard model of X. (shrink)

A theoretical development is carried to establish fundamental results about rank-initial embeddings and automorphisms of countable non-standard models of set theory, with a keen eye for their sets of fixed points. These results are then combined into a “geometric technique” used to prove several results about countable non-standard models of set theory. In particular, back-and-forth constructions are carried out to establish various generalizations and refinements of Friedman’s theorem on the existence of rank-initial embeddings between countable non-standard models of the fragment (...) \ + \-Separation of \; and Gaifman’s technique of iterated ultrapowers is employed to show that any countable model of \ can be elementarily rank-end-extended to models with well-behaved automorphisms whose sets of fixed points equal the original model. These theoretical developments are then utilized to prove various results relating self-embeddings, automorphisms, their sets of fixed points, strong rank-cuts, and set theories of different strengths. Two examples: The notion of “strong rank-cut” is characterized in terms of the theory \, and in terms of fixed-point sets of self-embeddings. (shrink)

It is proven that the following statement: "there exists a club $C \subseteq \kappa$ such that every α ∈ C is an inaccessible cardinal in L and, for every δ a limit point of C, C ∩ δ is almost contained in every club of δ of L" is equiconsistent with a weakly compact cardinal if κ = ℵ 1 , and with a weakly compact cardinal of order 1 if κ = ℵ 2.

Assuming the existence of a supercompact cardinal, we construct a model of ZFC + ). Answering a question of Uri Abraham [A], [A-S], we prove that adding a real to the world always makes P ℵ 1 - V stationary.

One 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. (shrink)

We are used to the idea that computers operate on numbers, yet another kind of data is equally important: the syntax of formal languages, with variables, binding, and alpha-equivalence. The original application of nominal techniques, and the one with greatest prominence in this paper, is to reasoning on formal syntax with variables and binding. Variables can be modelled in many ways: for instance as numbers (since we usually take countably many of them); as links (since they may `point' to a (...) binding site in the term, where they are bound); or as functions (since they often, though not always, represent `an unknown'). None of these models is perfect. In every case for the models above, problems arise when trying to use them as a basis for a fully formal mechanical treatment of formal language. The problems are practical—but their underlying cause may be mathematical. The issue is not whether formal syntax exists, since clearly it does, so much as what kind of mathematical structure it is. To illustrate this point by a parody, logical derivations can be modelled using a Gödel encoding (i.e., injected into the natural numbers). It would be false to conclude from this that proof-theory is a branch of number theory and can be understood in terms of, say, Peano's axioms. Similarly, as it turns out, it is false to conclude from the fact that variables can be encoded e.g., as numbers, that the theory of syntax-with-binding can be understood in terms of the theory of syntax-without-binding, plus the theory of numbers (or, taking this to a logical extreme, purely in terms of the theory of numbers). It cannot; something else is going on. What that something else is, has not yet been fully understood. In nominal techniques, variables are an instance of names, and names are data. We model names using urelemente with properties that, pleasingly enough, turn out to have been investigated by Fraenkel and Mostowski in the first half of the 20th century for a completely different purpose than modelling formal language. What makes this model really interesting is that it gives names distinctive properties which can be related to useful logic and programming principles for formal syntax. Since the initial publications, advances in the mathematics and presentation have been introduced piecemeal in the literature. This paper provides in a single accessible document an updated development of the foundations of nominal techniques. This gives the reader easy access to updated results and new proofs which they would otherwise have to search across two or more papers to find, and full proofs that in other publications may have been elided. We also include some new material not appearing elsewhere. (shrink)

In this paper we introduce some fusion properties of forcing notions which guarantee that an iteration with supports of size ⩽κ not only does not collapse κ+ but also preserves the strength of κ. This provides a general theory covering the known cases of tree iterations which preserve large cardinals [3], Friedman and Halilović [5], Friedman and Honzik [6], Friedman and Magidor [8], Friedman and Zdomskyy [10], Honzik [12]).

Local sentences and the formal languages they define were introduced by Ressayre in. We prove that locally finite ω‐languages and effective analytic sets have the same topological complexity: the Borel and Wadge hierarchies of the class of locally finite ω‐languages are equal to the Borel and Wadge hierarchies of the class of effective analytic sets. In particular, for each non‐null recursive ordinal there exist some ‐complete and some ‐complete locally finite ω‐languages, and the supremum of the set of Borel ranks (...) of locally finite ω‐languages is the ordinal, which is strictly greater than the first non‐recursive ordinal. This gives an answer to the question of the topological complexity of locally finite ω‐languages, which was asked by Simonnet and also by Duparc, Finkel, and Ressayre in. Moreover we show that the topological complexity of a locally finite ω‐language defined by a local sentence φ may depend on the models of the Zermelo‐Fraenkel axiomatic system. Using similar constructions as in the proof of the above results we also show that the equivalence, the inclusion, and the universality problems for locally finite ω‐languages are ‐complete, hence highly undecidable. (shrink)

We consider ω n -automatic structures which are relational structures whose domain and relations are accepted by automata reading ordinal words of length ω n for some integer n ≥ 1. We show that all these structures are ω-tree-automatic structures presentable by Muller or Rabin tree automata. We prove that the isomorphism relation for ω 2 -automatic (resp. ω n -automatic for n > 2) boolean algebras (respectively, partial orders, rings, commutative rings, non commutative rings, non commutative groups) is not (...) determined by the axiomatic system ZFC. We infer from the proof of the above result that the isomorphism problem for ω n -automatic boolean algebras, n ≥ 2, (respectively, rings, commutative rings, non commutative rings, non commutative groups) is neither a ${\mathrm{\Sigma }}_{2}^{1}-\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}$ nor a ${\mathrm{\Pi }}_{2}^{1}-\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{t}$ . We obtain that there exist infinitely many ω n -automatic, hence also ω-tree-automatic, atomless boolean algebras $\mathcal{B}_{n}$ , n ≥ 1, which are pairwise isomorphic under the continuum hypothesis CH and pairwise non isomorphic under an alternate axiom AT, strengthening a result of [14]. (shrink)

We prove that Rado's Conjecture implies that the nonstationary ideal on ω 1 is presaturated.

We show that $M \models \kappa$ is a completely Ramsey cardinal iff there is a Rowbottom M-ultrafilter on κ.

We show that a cardinal κ is a (strongly) Mahlo cardinal if and only if there exists a nontrivial κ-complete κ-normal ideal on κ. Also we show that if κ is Mahlo and λ ≥ κ and $\lambda^{ then there is a nontrivial κ-complete κ-normal fine ideal on P κ (λ). If κ is the successor of a cardinal, we consider weak κ-normality and prove that if κ = μ + and μ is a regular cardinal then (1) $\mu^{ if (...) and only if there is a nontrivial κ-complete weakly κ-normal ideal on κ, and (2) if $\mu^{ then there is a nontrivial κ-complete weakly κ-normal fine ideal on P κ (λ). (shrink)

In the following paper we propose a model-theoretical way of comparing the “strength” of various truth theories which are conservative over PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ PA $$\end{document}. Let Th\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathfrak {Th}}$$\end{document} denote the class of models of PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ PA $$\end{document} which admit an expansion to a model of theory Th\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} (...) \begin{document}$${ Th}$$\end{document}. We show that PA⊃TB⊃RS⊃UTB⊇CT-,\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\begin{aligned} {{\mathfrak {PA}}}\supset {\mathfrak {TB}}\supset {{\mathfrak {RS}}}\supset {\mathfrak {UTB}}\supseteq \mathfrak {CT^-}, \end{aligned}$$\end{document}where PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathfrak {PA}}$$\end{document} denotes simply the class of all models of PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ PA $$\end{document} and RS\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathfrak {RS}}$$\end{document} denotes the class of recursively saturated models of PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ PA $$\end{document}. Our main original result is that every model of PA\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ PA $$\end{document} which admits an expansion to a model of CT-\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ CT ^-$$\end{document}, admits also an expansion to a model of UTB\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ UTB $$\end{document}. Moreover, as a corollary to one of the results we conclude that UTB\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ UTB $$\end{document} is not relatively interpretable in TB\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$ TB $$\end{document}, thus answering the question from Fujimoto. (shrink)

We show that it is relatively consistent with ZFC to have PCF structures of heightδ, for all ordinalsδ<ω3.

We characterize, in terms of determinacy, the existence of 0 ♯♯ as well as the existence of each of the following: 0 ♯♯♯ , 0 ♯♯♯♯ ,0 ♯♯♯♯♯ , .... For k ∈ ω, we define two classes of sets, (k * Σ 0 1 ) * and (k * Σ 0 1 ) * + , which lie strictly between $\bigcup_{\beta and Δ(ω 2 -Π 1 1 ). We also define 0 1♯ as 0 ♯ and in general, 0 (...) (k + 1)♯ as (0 k♯) ♯ . We then show that the existence of 0 (k + 1)♯ is equivalent to the determinacy of ((k + 1) * Σ 0 1 ) * as well as the determinacy of (k * Σ 0 1 ) * +. (shrink)

A model of ZFC is constructed in which the distributivity cardinal h is 2 ℵ 0 = ℵ 2 , and in which there are no ω 2 -towers in [ω] ω . As an immediate corollary, it follows that any base-matrix tree in this model has no cofinal branches. The model is constructed via a form of iterated Mathias forcing, in which a mixture of finite and countable supports is used.

We suggest a new approach for addressing the problem of establishing an axiomatic foundation for large cardinals. An axiom asserting the existence of a large cardinal can naturally be viewed as a strong Axiom of Infinity. However, it has not been clear on the basis of our knowledge of ω itself, or of generally agreed upon intuitions about the true nature of the mathematical universe, what the right strengthening of the Axiom of Infinity is—which large cardinals ought to be derivable? (...) It was shown in the 1960s by Lawvere that the existence of an infinite set is equivalent to the existence of a certain kind of structure-preserving transformation from V to itself, not isomorphic to the identity. We use Lawvere's transformation, rather than ω, as a starting point for a reasonably natural sequence of strengthenings and refinements, leading to a proposed strong Axiom of Infinity. A first refinement was discussed in later work by Trnková—Blass, showing that if the preservation properties of Lawvere's tranformation are strengthened to the point of requiring it to be an exact functor , such a transformation is provably equivalent to the existence of a measurable cardinal. We propose to push the preservation properties as far as possible, short of inconsistency. The resulting transformation V→V is strong enough to account for virtually all large cardinals, but is at the same time a natural generalization of an assertion about transformations V→V known to be equivalent to the Axiom of Infinity. (shrink)

We improve results of Marczewski, Frankiewicz, Brown, and others comparing the σ-ideals of measure zero, meager, Marczewski measure zero, and completely Ramsey null sets; in particular, we remove CH from the hypothesis of many of Brown's constructions of sets lying in some of these ideals but not in others. We improve upon work of Marczewski by constructing, without CH, a nonmeasurable Marczewski measure zero set lacking the property of Baire. We extend our analysis of σ-ideals to include the completely Ramsey (...) null sets relative to a Ramsey ultrafilter and obtain all 32 possible examples of sets in some ideals and not others, some under the assumption of MA, but most in ZFC alone. We also improve upon the known constructions of a Marczewski measure zero set which is not Ramsey by using a set theoretic hypothesis which is weaker than those used by other authors. We give several consistency proofs: one concerning the relative sizes of the covering numbers for the meager sets and the completely Ramsey null sets; another concerning the size of non(CRU 0); and a third concerning the size of add(CRU 0). We also study those classes of perfect sets which are bases for the class of always first category sets. (shrink)

If the Bounded Proper Forcing Axiom BPFA holds, then Mouse Reflection holds at N₂ with respect to all mouse operators up to the level of Woodin cardinals in the next ZFC-model. This yields that if Woodin's ℙ max axiom (*) holds, then BPFA implies that V is closed under the "Woodin-in-the-next-ZFC-model" operator. We also discuss stronger Mouse Reflection principles which we show to follow from strengthenings of BPFA, and we discuss the theory BPFA plus "NS ω1 is precipitous" and strengthenings (...) thereof. Along the way, we answer a question of Baumgartner and Taylor. [2, Question 6.11]. (shrink)

We show that the modal propositional logic G, originally introduced to describe the modality "it is provable that", is also sound for various interpretations using filters on ordinal numbers, for example the end-segment filters, the club filters, or the ineffable filters. We also prove that G is complete for the interpretation using end-segment filters. In the case of club filters, we show that G is complete if Jensen's principle □ κ holds for all $\kappa ; on the other hand, it (...) is consistent relative to a Mahlo cardinal that G be incomplete for the club filter interpretation. (shrink)

In this paper, I will attempt to develop and defend a common form of intuitive resistance to the companions in guilt argument. I will argue that one can reasonably believe there are promising solutions to the access problem for mathematical realism that don’t translate to moral realism. In particular, I will suggest that the structuralist project of accounting for mathematical knowledge in terms of some form of logical knowledge offers significant hope of success while no analogous approach offers such hope (...) for moral realism. (shrink)

If dominating functions in ω ω are adjoined repeatedly over a model of GCH via a finite-support c.c.c. iteration, then in the resulting generic extension there are no long towers, every well-ordered unbounded family of increasing functions is a scale, and the splitting number s (and hence the distributivity number h) remains at ω 1.

A pervasive thought in contemporary philosophy of mathematics is that in order to justify reflection principles, one must hold universism: the view that there is a single universe of pure sets. I challenge this kind of reasoning by contrasting universism with a Zermelian form of multiversism. I argue that if extant justifications of reflection principles using notions of richness are acceptable for the universist, then the Zermelian can use similar justifications. However, I note that for some forms of richness argument, (...) the status of reflection principles as axioms is left open for the Zermelian. (shrink)

Let I be an ideal of subsets of a Polish space X, containing all singletons and possessing a Borel basis. Assuming that I does not satisfy ccc, we consider the following conditions (B), (M) and (D). Condition (B) states that there is a disjoint family F $\subseteq$ P(X) of size c, consisting of Borel sets which are not in I. Condition (M) states that there is a Borel function f: X → X with $f^{-1}[\{x\}] \not\in$ I for each x ∈ (...) X. Provided that X is a group and I is invariant, condition (D) states that there exist a Borel set B $\not\in$ I and a perfect set P $\subseteq$ X for which the family $\{B + x: x \in P\}$ is disjoint. The aim of the paper is to study whether the reverse implications in the chain (D) $\Rightarrow$ (M) $\Rightarrow$ (B) $\Rightarrow$ not-ccc can hold. We build a σ-ideal on the Cantor group witnessing (M) & ¬ (D) (Section 2). A modified version of that σ-ideal contains the whole space (Section 3). Some consistency results on deriving (M) from (B) for "nicely" defined ideals are established (Sections 4 and 5). We show that both ccc and (M) can fail (Theorems 1.3 and 5.6). Finally, some sharp versions of (M) for invariant ideals on Polish groups are investigated (Section 6). (shrink)