In set theory, a maximality principle is a principle that asserts some maximality property of the universe of sets or some part thereof. Set theorists have formulated a variety of maximality principles in order to settle statements left undecided by current standard set theory. In addition, philosophers of mathematics have explored maximality principles whilst attempting to prove categoricity theorems for set theory or providing criteria for selecting foundational theories. This article reviews recent work concerned with the formulation, investigation and justification (...) of maximality principles. (shrink)

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. (shrink)

We investigate questions involving Aronszajn trees, square principles, and stationary reflection. We first consider two strengthenings of introduced by Brodsky and Rinot for the purpose of constructing κ‐Souslin trees. Answering a question of Rinot, we prove that the weaker of these strengthenings is compatible with stationary reflection at κ but the stronger is not. We then prove that, if μ is a singular cardinal, implies the existence of a special ‐tree with a cf(μ)‐ascent path, thus answering a question of Lücke.

We give simple proofs of the Singular Cardinal Hypothesis from the Weak Reflection Principle and the Fodor-type Reflection Principle which do not use better scales.

Moore introduced the Mapping Reflection Principle and proved that the Bounded Proper Forcing Axiom implies that the size of the continuum is ℵ2\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\aleph _2$$\end{document}. The Mapping Reflection Principle follows from the Proper Forcing Axiom. To show this, Moore utilized forcing notions whose conditions are countable objects. Chodounský–Zapletal introduced the Y-Proper Forcing Axiom that is a weak fragments of the Proper Forcing Axiom but implies some important conclusions from the Proper Forcing Axiom, (...) for example, the P-ideal Dichotomy. In this article, it is proved that the Y-Proper Forcing Axiom implies the Mapping Reflection Principle by introducing forcing notions whose conditions are finite objects. (shrink)

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 ↠ 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. (shrink)

Viale introduced covering matrices in his proof that SCH follows from PFA. In the course of the proof and subsequent work with Sharon, he isolated two reflection principles, CP and S, which, under certain circumstances, are satisfied by all covering matrices of a certain shape. Using square sequences, we construct covering matrices for which CP and S fail. This leads naturally to an investigation of square principles intermediate between □κ and □ for a regular cardinal κ. We provide a detailed (...) picture of the implications between these square principles. (shrink)