In this paper I shall present a method for proving determinacy from large cardinals which, in many cases, seems to yield optimal results. One of the main applications extends theorems of Martin, Steel and Woodin about determinacy within the projective hierarchy. The method can also be used to give a new proof of Woodin's theorem about determinacy in L.The reason we look for optimal determinacy proofs is not only vanity. Such proofs serve to tighten the connection between large cardinals and (...) descriptive set theory, letting us bring our knowledge of one subject to bear on the other, and thus increasing our understanding of both. A classic example of this is the Harrington-Martin proof that -determinacy implies -determinacy. This is an example of a transfer theorem, which assumes a certain determinacy hypothesis and proves a stronger one. While the statement of the theorem makes no mention of large cardinals, its proof goes through 0#, first proving that-determinacy ⇒ 0# exists,and then that0# exists ⇒ -determinacyMore recent examples of the connection between large cardinals and descriptive set theory include Steel's proof thatADL ⇒ HODL ⊨ GCH,see [9], and several results of Woodin about models of AD+, a strengthening of the axiom of determinacy AD which Woodin has introduced. These proofs not only use large cardinals, but also reveal a deep, structural connection between descriptive set theoretic notions and notions related to large cardinals. (shrink)

We present two ways in which the model L(R) is canonical assuming the existence of large cardinals. We show that the theory of this model, with ordinal parameters, cannot be changed by small forcing; we show further that a set of ordinals in V cannot be added to L(R) by small forcing. The large cardinal needed corresponds to the consistency strength of AD L (R); roughly ω Woodin cardinals.

This is the softcover reprint of the very popular hardcover edition. The theory of large cardinals is currently a broad mainstream of modern set theory, the main area of investigation for the analysis of the relative consistency of mathematical propositions and possible new axioms for mathematics. The first of a projected multi-volume series, this book provides a comprehensive account of the theory of large cardinals from its beginnings and some of the direct outgrowths leading to the frontiers of contemporary research. (...) A a oegenetica approach is taken, presenting the subject in the context of its historical development. With hindsight the consequential avenues are pursued and the most elegant or accessible expositions given. With open questions and speculations provided throughout the reader should not only come to appreciate the scope and coherence of the overall enterprise but also become prepared to pursue research in several specific areas by studying the relevant sections. (shrink)

We extend the core model induction technique to a choiceless context, and we exploit it to show that each one of the following two hypotheses individually implies that , the Axiom of Determinacy, holds in the of a generic extension of : every uncountable cardinal is singular, and every infinite successor cardinal is weakly compact and every uncountable limit cardinal is singular.

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 $L$.

Let L[E] be an iterable tame extender model. We analyze to which extent L[E] knows fragments of its own iteration strategy. Specifically, we prove that inside L[E], for every cardinal K which is not a limit of Woodin cardinals there is some cutpoint t K > a>ω1 are cardinals, then ◊$_{K.\lambda }^* $ holds true, and if in addition λ is regular, then ◊$_{K.\lambda }^* $ holds true.

Assuming every real has a sharp, we prove that for any $\mathop \prod \limits_\~ _1^1 $ equivalence relation either Borel reduces E₀ or in a $\mathop \Delta \limits_\~ _3^1 $ manner allows the assignment of bounded subsets of ω₁ as complete invariants.

The Martin-Steel coarse inner model theory is employed in obtaining new results in descriptive set theory. $\underset{\sim}{\Pi}$ determinacy implies that for every thin Σ 1 2 equivalence relation there is a Δ 1 3 real, N, over which every equivalence class is generic--and hence there is a good Δ 1 2 (N ♯ ) wellordering of the equivalence classes. Analogous results are obtained for Π 1 2 and Δ 1 2 quasilinear orderings and $\underset{\sim}{\Pi}^1_2$ determinacy is shown to imply that (...) every Π 1 2 prewellorder has rank less than $\underset{\sim}{\delta}^1_2$. (shrink)

Let E be a Σ1 1 equivalence relation for which there does not exist a perfect set of inequivalent reals. If 0# exists or if V is a forcing extension of L, then there is a good ▵1 2 well-ordering of the equivalence classes.

In the presence of large cardinals, or sufficient determinacy, every equivalence relation in L(R) either admits a wellordered separating family or continuously reduces E 0.

The main result of this paper is the following theorem: Let M be a premouse with a top extender, F. Suppose that (a) M is linearly coarsely iterable via hitting F and its images, and (b) if M * is a linear iterate of M as in (a), then M * is coarsely iterable with respect to iteration trees which do not use the top extender of M * and its images. Then M is coarsely iterable.

In this paper we consider whether L(R) has “enough information” to contain a counterexample to the continuum hypothesis. We believe this question provides deep insight into the difficulties surrounding the continuum hypothesis. We show sufficient conditions for L(R) not to contain such a counterexample. Along the way we establish many results about nonstationary towers, non-reflecting stationary sets, generalizations of proper and semiproper forcing and Chang's conjecture.

We study the projective posets and their properties as forcing notions. We also define Martin's axiom restricted to projective sets, MA, and show that this axiom is weaker than full Martin's axiom by proving the consistency of ZFC + ¬lCH + MA with “there exists a Suslin tree”, “there exists a non-strong gap”, “there exists an entangled set of reals” and “there exists κ < 20 such that 20 < 2k”.