Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Happy families.A. R. D. Mathias - 1977 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 12 (1):59.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   94 citations  
  • Indestructible Weakly Compact Cardinals and the Necessity of Supercompactness for Certain Proof Schemata.J. D. Hamkins & A. W. Apter - 2001 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 47 (4):563-572.
    We show that if the weak compactness of a cardinal is made indestructible by means of any preparatory forcing of a certain general type, including any forcing naively resembling the Laver preparation, then the cardinal was originally supercompact. We then apply this theorem to show that the hypothesis of supercompactness is necessary for certain proof schemata.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Strongly unfoldable cardinals made indestructible.Thomas A. Johnstone - 2008 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 73 (4):1215-1248.
    I provide indestructibility results for large cardinals consistent with V = L, such as weakly compact, indescribable and strongly unfoldable cardinals. The Main Theorem shows that any strongly unfoldable cardinal κ can be made indestructible by <κ-closed. κ-proper forcing. This class of posets includes for instance all <κ-closed posets that are either κ -c.c, or ≤κ-strategically closed as well as finite iterations of such posets. Since strongly unfoldable cardinals strengthen both indescribable and weakly compact cardinals, the Main Theorem therefore makes (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Removing Laver functions from supercompactness arguments.Arthur W. Apter - 2005 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (2):154.
    We show how the use of a Laver function in the proof of the consistency, relative to the existence of a supercompact cardinal, of both the Proper Forcing Axiom and the Semiproper Forcing Axiom can be eliminated via the use of lottery sums of the appropriate partial orderings.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Review: Robert M. Solovay, A Model of Set-Theory in which Every Set of Reals is Lebesgue Measurable. [REVIEW]Richard Laver - 1973 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 38 (3):529-529.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   39 citations  
  • Closed maximality principles: implications, separations and combinations.Gunter Fuchs - 2008 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 73 (1):276-308.
    l investigate versions of the Maximality Principles for the classes of forcings which are <κ-closed. <κ-directed-closed, or of the form Col (κ. <Λ). These principles come in many variants, depending on the parameters which are allowed. I shall write MPΓ(A) for the maximality principle for forcings in Γ, with parameters from A. The main results of this paper are: • The principles have many consequences, such as <κ-closed-generic $\Sigma _{2}^{1}(H_{\kappa})$ absoluteness, and imply. e.g., that ◇κ holds. I give an application (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Combined Maximality Principles up to large cardinals.Gunter Fuchs - 2009 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (3):1015-1046.
    The motivation for this paper is the following: In [4] I showed that it is inconsistent with ZFC that the Maximality Principle for directed closed forcings holds at unboundedly many regular cardinals κ (even only allowing κ itself as a parameter in the Maximality Principle for < κ -closed forcings each time). So the question is whether it is consistent to have this principle at unboundedly many regular cardinals or at every regular cardinal below some large cardinal κ (instead of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Stacking mice.Ronald Jensen, Ernest Schimmerling, Ralf Schindler & John Steel - 2009 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (1):315-335.
    We show that either of the following hypotheses imply that there is an inner model with a proper class of strong cardinals and a proper class of Woodin cardinals. 1) There is a countably closed cardinal k ≥ N₃ such that □k and □(k) fail. 2) There is a cardinal k such that k is weakly compact in the generic extension by Col(k, k⁺). Of special interest is 1) with k = N₃ since it follows from PFA by theorems of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Small forcing makes any cardinal superdestructible.Joel David Hamkins - 1998 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (1):51-58.
    Small forcing always ruins the indestructibility of an indestructible supercompact cardinal. In fact, after small forcing, any cardinal κ becomes superdestructible--any further <κ--closed forcing which adds a subset to κ will destroy the measurability, even the weak compactness, of κ. Nevertheless, after small forcing indestructible cardinals remain resurrectible, but never strongly resurrectible.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations