Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. (2 other versions)Scales, squares and reflection.James Cummings, Matthew Foreman & Menachem Magidor - 2001 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 1 (1):35-98.
    Since the work of Gödel and Cohen, which showed that Hilbert's First Problem was independent of the usual assumptions of mathematics, there have been a myriad of independence results in many areas of mathematics. These results have led to the systematic study of several combinatorial principles that have proven effective at settling many of the important independent statements. Among the most prominent of these are the principles diamond and square discovered by Jensen. Simultaneously, attempts have been made to find suitable (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   67 citations  
  • [Omnibus Review].Thomas Jech - 1992 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (1):261-262.
    Reviewed Works:John R. Steel, A. S. Kechris, D. A. Martin, Y. N. Moschovakis, Scales on $\Sigma^1_1$ Sets.Yiannis N. Moschovakis, Scales on Coinductive Sets.Donald A. Martin, John R. Steel, The Extent of Scales in $L$.John R. Steel, Scales in $L$.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   219 citations  
  • How large is the first strongly compact cardinal? or a study on identity crises.Menachem Magidor - 1976 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 10 (1):33-57.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   59 citations  
  • Failures of SCH and Level by Level Equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 45 (7):831-838.
    We construct a model for the level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness in which below the least supercompact cardinal κ, there is a stationary set of cardinals on which SCH fails. In this model, the structure of the class of supercompact cardinals can be arbitrary.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The least measurable can be strongly compact and indestructible.Arthur Apter & Moti Gitik - 1998 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (4):1404-1412.
    We 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.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • (2 other versions)Squares, scales and stationary reflection.James Cummings, Matthew Foreman & Menachem Magidor - 2001 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 1 (01):35-98.
    Since the work of Gödel and Cohen, which showed that Hilbert's First Problem was independent of the usual assumptions of mathematics, there have been a myriad of independence results in many areas of mathematics. These results have led to the systematic study of several combinatorial principles that have proven effective at settling many of the important independent statements. Among the most prominent of these are the principles diamond and square discovered by Jensen. Simultaneously, attempts have been made to find suitable (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   105 citations  
  • Strong axioms of infinity and elementary embeddings.Robert M. Solovay - 1978 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 13 (1):73.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   122 citations  
  • Identity crises and strong compactness : II. Strong cardinals.Arthur W. Apter & James Cummings - 2001 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 40 (1):25-38.
    . From a proper class of supercompact cardinals, we force and obtain a model in which the proper classes of strongly compact and strong cardinals precisely coincide. In this model, it is the case that no strongly compact cardinal \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $\kappa$\end{document} is \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document} $2^\kappa = \kappa^+$\end{document} supercompact.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Gap forcing: Generalizing the lévy-Solovay theorem.Joel David Hamkins - 1999 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):264-272.
    The Lévy-Solovay Theorem [8] limits the kind of large cardinal embeddings that can exist in a small forcing extension. Here I announce a generalization of this theorem to a broad new class of forcing notions. One consequence is that many of the forcing iterations most commonly found in the large cardinal literature create no new weakly compact cardinals, measurable cardinals, strong cardinals, Woodin cardinals, strongly compact cardinals, supercompact cardinals, almost huge cardinals, huge cardinals, and so on.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  • The lottery preparation.Joel David Hamkins - 2000 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 101 (2-3):103-146.
    The lottery preparation, a new general kind of Laver preparation, works uniformly with supercompact cardinals, strongly compact cardinals, strong cardinals, measurable cardinals, or what have you. And like the Laver preparation, the lottery preparation makes these cardinals indestructible by various kinds of further forcing. A supercompact cardinal κ, for example, becomes fully indestructible by <κ-directed closed forcing; a strong cardinal κ becomes indestructible by κ-strategically closed forcing; and a strongly compact cardinal κ becomes indestructible by, among others, the forcing to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations  
  • The least strongly compact can be the least strong and indestructible.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 144 (1-3):33-42.
    We construct two models in which the least strongly compact cardinal κ is also the least strong cardinal. In each of these models, κ satisfies indestructibility properties for both its strong compactness and strongness.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations