Artykuł dotyczy zagadnienia, w jakim sensie można stosować kategorię wyjaśnienia do interpretacji filozofii matematyki Kurta Gödla. Gödel – jako realista matematyczny – twierdzi bowiem, że w wypadku matematyki mamy do czynienia z niezależnymi od nas faktami. Jednym z owych faktów jest właśnie rozwiązywalność wszystkich dobrze postawionych problemów matematycznych – i ten fakt domaga się wyjaśnienia. Kluczem do zrozumienia stanowiska Gödla jest identyfikacja założeń, na których się opiera: metafizyczny realizm: istnieje uniwersum matematyczne, ma ono charakter obiektywny, niezależny od nas; optymizm epistemologiczny: (...) jesteśmy wyposażeni w wystarczająco dobre środki poznawcze, aby uzyskać wgląd w owo uniwersum. Pojęcie rozwiązania problemu matematycznego Gödel rozumie znacznie szerzej niż jako podanie matematycznego dowodu – chodzi raczej o znalezienie wiarogodnych aksjomatów, prowadzących do rozwiązania. Stawiany w artykule problem analizuję na przykładzie hipotezy kontinuum. (shrink)

The article deals with the question of in which sense the notion of explanation can be applied to Kurt Gödel’s philosophy of mathematics. Gödel, as a mathematical realist, claims that in mathematics we are dealing with facts that have an objective character. One of these facts is the solvability of all well-formulated mathematical problems—and this fact requires a clarification. The assumptions on which Gödel’s position is based are: metaphysical realism: there is a mathematical universe, it is objective and independent of (...) us; epistemological optimism: we are equipped with sufficient cognitive power to gain insight into the universe. Gödel’s concept of a solution to a mathematical problem is much broader than of a mathematical proof—it is rather about finding reliable axioms that lead to a solution of the problem. I analyse the problem presented in the article, taking as an example the continuum hypothesis. (shrink)

In this article I investigate the phenomenon of minimum and minimal models of second-order set theories, focusing on Kelley–Morse set theory KM, Gödel–Bernays set theory GB, and GB augmented with the principle of Elementary Transfinite Recursion. The main results are the following. (1) A countable model of ZFC has a minimum GBC-realization if and only if it admits a parametrically definable global well order. (2) Countable models of GBC admit minimal extensions with the same sets. (3) There is no minimum (...) transitive model of KM. (4) There is a minimum β-model of GB+ETR. The main question left unanswered by this article is whether there is a minimum transitive model of GB+ETR. (shrink)

I will give a brief overview of Saharon Shelah’s work in mathematical logic. I will focus on three transformative contributions Shelah has made: stability theory, proper forcing and PCF theory. The first is in model theory and the other two are in set theory.

We discuss dividing lines (in model theory) and some test questions, mainly the universality spectrum. So there is much on conjectures, problems and old results, mainly of the author and also on some recent results.

We show that the Proper Forcing Axiom implies the Singular Cardinal Hypothesis. The proof uses the reflection principle MRP introduced by Moore in [11].

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)

Let Q be an equivalence relation whose equivalence classes, denoted Q[x], may be proper classes. A function L defined on Field(Q) is a labelling for Q if and only if for all x,L(x) is a set and L is a labelling by subsets for Q if and only if BG denotes Bernays-Gödel class-set theory with neither the axiom of foundation, AF, nor the class axiom of choice, E. The following are relatively consistent with BG. (1) E is true but there (...) is an equivalence relation with no labelling.(2) E is true and every equivalence relation has a labelling, but there is an equivalence relation with no labelling by subsets. (shrink)

James Earl Baumgartner (March 23, 1943–December 28, 2011) came of age mathematically during the emergence of forcing as a fundamental technique of set theory, and his seminal research changed the way set theory is done. He made fundamental contributions to the development of forcing, to our understanding of uncountable orders, to the partition calculus, and to large cardinals and their ideals. He promulgated the use of logic such as absoluteness and elementary submodels to solve problems in set theory, he applied (...) his knowledge of set theory to a variety of areas in collaboration with other mathematicians, and he encouraged a community of mathematicians with engaging survey talks, enthusiastic discussions of open problems, and friendly mathematical conversations. (shrink)

In earlier work by the first and second authors, the equivalence of a finite square principle $\square^{\mathrm{fin}}_{\lambda,D}$ with various model-theoretic properties of structures of size $\lambda $ and regular ultrafilters was established. In this paper we investigate the principle $\square^{\mathrm{fin}}_{\lambda,D}$—and thereby the above model-theoretic properties—at a regular cardinal. By Chang’s two-cardinal theorem, $\square^{\mathrm{fin}}_{\lambda,D}$ holds at regular cardinals for all regular filters $D$ if we assume the generalized continuum hypothesis. In this paper we prove in ZFC that, for certain regular filters (...) that we call $\mathit{doubly}^{+}$ regular, $\square^{\mathrm{fin}}_{\lambda,D}$ holds at regular cardinals, with no assumption about GCH. Thus we get new positive answers in ZFC to Open Problems 18 and 19 in Chang and Keisler’s book Model Theory. (shrink)

Set theory is an autonomous and sophisticated field of mathematics, enormously successful not only at its continuing development of its historical heritage but also at analyzing mathematical propositions cast in set-theoretic terms and gauging their consistency strength. But set theory is also distinguished by having begun intertwined with pronounced metaphysical attitudes, and these have even been regarded as crucial by some of its great developers. This has encouraged the exaggeration of crises in foundations and of metaphysical doctrines in general. However, (...) set theory has proceeded in the opposite direction, from a web of intensions to a theory of extensionpar excellence, and like other fields of mathematics its vitality and progress have depended on a steadily growing core of mathematical structures and methods, problems and results. There is also the stronger contention that from the beginning set theory actually developed through a progression ofmathematicalmoves, whatever and sometimes in spite of what has been claimed on its behalf.What follows is an account of the development of set theory from its beginnings through the creation of forcing based on these contentions, with an avowedly Whiggish emphasis on the heritage that has been retained and developed by current set theory. The whole transfinite landscape can be viewed as the result of Cantor's attempt to articulate and solve the Continuum Problem. (shrink)

A new axiom is proposed, the Ground Axiom, asserting that the universe is not a nontrivial set forcing extension of any inner model. The Ground Axiom is first-order expressible, and any model of ZFC has a class forcing extension which satisfies it. The Ground Axiom is independent of many well-known set-theoretic assertions including the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis, the assertion V=HOD that every set is ordinal definable, and the existence of measurable and supercompact cardinals. The related Bedrock Axiom, asserting that the (...) universe is a set forcing extension of a model satisfying the Ground Axiom, is also first-order expressible, and its negation is consistent. (shrink)

§1. Introduction. Among the most remarkable discoveries in set theory in the last quarter century is the rich structure of the arithmetic of singular cardinals, and its deep relationship to large cardinals. The problem of finding a complete set of rules describing the behavior of the continuum function 2ℵα for singular ℵα's, known as the Singular Cardinals Problem, has been attacked by many different techniques, involving forcing, large cardinals, inner models, and various combinatorial methods. The work on the singular cardinals (...) problem has led to many often surprising results, culminating in a beautiful theory of Saharon Shelah called the pcf theory. The most striking result to date states that if 2ℵn < ℵω for every n = 0, 1, 2, …, then 2ℵω < ℵω4.In this paper we present a brief history of the singular cardinals problem, the present knowledge, and an introduction into Shelah's pcf theory. In Sections 2, 3 and 4 we introduce the reader to cardinal arithmetic and to the singular cardinals problems. Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 describe the main results and methods of the last 25 years and explain the role of large cardinals in the singular cardinals problem. In Section 9 we present an outline of the pcf theory.§2. The arithmetic of cardinal numbers. Cardinal numbers were introduced by Cantor in the late 19th century and problems arising from investigations of rules of arithmetic of cardinal numbers led to the birth of set theory. The operations of addition, multiplication and exponentiation of infinite cardinal numbers are a natural generalization of such operations on integers. Addition and multiplication of infinite cardinals turns out to be simple: when at least one of the numbers κ, λ is infinite then both κ + λ and κ·λ are equal to max {κ, λ}. In contrast with + and ·, exponentiation presents fundamental problems. In the simplest nontrivial case, 2κ represents the cardinal number of the power set P, the set of all subsets of κ. (Here we adopt the usual convention of set theory that the number κ is identified with a set of cardinality κ, namely the set of all ordinal numbers smaller than κ. (shrink)

We say that κ is μ-hypermeasurable for a cardinal μ≥κ+ if there is an embedding j:V→M with critical point κ such that HV is included in M and j>μ. Such a j is called a witnessing embedding.Building on the results in [7], we will show that if V satisfies GCH and F is an Easton function from the regular cardinals into cardinals satisfying some mild restrictions, then there exists a cardinal-preserving forcing extension V* where F is realised on all V-regular (...) cardinals and moreover, all F-hypermeasurable cardinals κ, where F>κ+, with a witnessing embedding j such that either j=κ+ or j≥F, are turned into singular strong limit cardinals with cofinality ω. This provides some partial information about the possible structure of a continuum function with respect to singular cardinals with countable cofinality.As a corollary, this shows that the continuum function on a singular strong limit cardinal κ of cofinality ω is virtually independent of the behaviour of the continuum function below κ, at least for continuum functions which are simple in that 2α{α+,α++} for every cardinal α below κ ≥F or j=κ+). (shrink)

Ehrenfeucht’s lemma asserts that whenever one element of a model of Peano arithmetic is definable from another, they satisfy different types. We consider here the analogue of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma for models of set theory. The original argument applies directly to the ordinal-definable elements of any model of set theory, and, in particular, Ehrenfeucht’s lemma holds fully for models of set theory satisfying V=HOD. We show that the lemma fails in the forcing extension of the universe by adding a Cohen real. (...) We go on to formulate a scheme of natural parametric generalizations of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma, namely, the principles of the form EL, which asserts that P-definability from A implies Q-discernibility. We also consider various analogues of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma obtained by using algebraicity in place of definability, where a set b is algebraic in a if it is a member of a finite set definable from a. Ehrenfeucht’s lemma holds for the ordinal-algebraic sets, we prove, if and only if the ordinal-algebraic and ordinal-definable sets coincide. Using a similar analysis, we answer two open questions posed earlier by the third author and C. Leahy, showing that algebraicity and definability need not coincide in models of set theory and the internal and external notions of being ordinal algebraic need not coincide. (shrink)

An Easton function is a monotone function C from infinite regular cardinals to cardinals such that C has cofinality greater than α for each infinite regular cardinal α. Easton showed that assuming GCH, if C is a definable Easton function then in some cofinality-preserving extension, C=2α for all infinite regular cardinals α. Using “generic modification”, we show that over the ground model L, models witnessing Easton’s theorem can be obtained as inner models of L[0#], for Easton functions which are L-definable (...) with parameters at most . And using a gap 1 morass, we obtain an inner model of L[0#] with the same cofinalities as L in which is a strong limit cardinal and equals. (shrink)

In a previous paper with M. Džamonja, class forcings were given which fixed the complexity (a universality covering number) for certain types of structures of size λ together with the value of 2λ for every regular λ. As part of a programme for examining when such global results can be true in an inner model, we build generics for these class forcings.

The equiconsistency of a measurable cardinal with Mitchell order o=κ++ with a measurable cardinal such that 2κ=κ++ follows from the results by W. Mitchell [13] and M. Gitik [7]. These results were later generalized to measurable cardinals with 2κ larger than κ++ .In Friedman and Honzik [5], we formulated and proved Eastonʼs theorem [4] in a large cardinal setting, using slightly stronger hypotheses than the lower bounds identified by Mitchell and Gitik , for a suitable μ, instead of the cardinals (...) with the appropriate Mitchell order).In this paper, we use a new idea which allows us to carry out the constructions in Friedman and Honzik [5] from the optimal hypotheses. It follows that the lower bounds identified by Mitchell and Gitik are optimal also with regard to the general behavior of the continuum function on regulars in the context of measurable cardinals. (shrink)

The continuum function αmaps to2α on regular cardinals is known to have great freedom. Let us say that F is an Easton function iff for regular cardinals α and β, image and α<β→F≤F. The classic example of an Easton function is the continuum function αmaps to2α on regular cardinals. If GCH holds then any Easton function is the continuum function on regular cardinals of some cofinality-preserving extension V[G]; we say that F is realised in V[G]. However if we also wish (...) to preserve measurable cardinals, new restrictions must be put on F. We say that κ is F-hypermeasurable iff there is an elementary embedding j:V→M with critical point κ such that H)Vsubset of or equal toM; j will be called a witnessing embedding. We will show that if GCH holds then for any Easton function F there is a cofinality-preserving generic extension V[G] such that if κ, closed under F, is F-hypermeasurable in V and there is a witnessing embedding j such that j≥F, then κ will remain measurable in V[G]. (shrink)

The minimal ordinal-connection axiom $$MOC$$ was introduced by the first author in R. Freire. (South Am. J. Log. 2:347–359, 2016). We observe that $$MOC$$ is equivalent to a number of statements on the existence of certain hierarchies on the universe, and that under global choice, $$MOC$$ is in fact equivalent to the $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$. Our main results then show that $$MOC$$ corresponds to a weak version of global choice in models of the $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$ : it can fail in models of the (...) $${{\,\mathrm{GCH}\,}}$$ without global choice, but also global choice can fail in models of $$MOC$$. (shrink)

We show that it is consistent relative to a huge cardinal that for all infinite cardinals [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text] holds and there is a stationary [Formula: see text] such that [Formula: see text] is [Formula: see text]-saturated.

This paper develops the model theory of ordered structures that satisfy Keisler’s regularity scheme and its strengthening REF ${(\mathcal{L})}$ (the reflection scheme) which is an analogue of the reflection principle of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory. Here ${\mathcal{L}}$ is a language with a distinguished linear order <, and REF ${(\mathcal {L})}$ consists of formulas of the form $$\exists x \forall y_{1} < x \ldots \forall y_{n} < x \varphi (y_{1},\ldots ,y_{n})\leftrightarrow \varphi^{ < x}(y_1, \ldots ,y_n),$$ where φ is an ${\mathcal{L}}$ -formula, φ (...) shrink)

Plato’s philosophy is important to Badiou for a number of reasons, chief among which is that Badiou considered Plato to have recognised that mathematics provides the only sound or adequate basis for ontology. The mathematical basis of ontology is central to Badiou’s philosophy, and his engagement with Plato is instrumental in determining how he positions his philosophy in relation to those approaches to the philosophy of mathematics that endorse an orthodox Platonic realism, i.e. the independent existence of a realm of (...) mathematical objects. The Platonism that Badiou makes claim to bears little resemblance to this orthodoxy. Like Plato, Badiou insists on the primacy of the eternal and immu- table abstraction of the mathematico-ontological Idea; however, Badiou’s reconstructed Platonism champions the mathematics of post-Cantorian set theory, which itself af rms the irreducible multiplicity of being. Badiou in this way recon gures the Platonic notion of the relation between the one and the multiple in terms of the multiple-without-one as represented in the axiom of the void or empty set. Rather than engage with the Plato that is gured in the ontological realism of the orthodox Platonic approach to the philosophy of mathematics, Badiou is intent on characterising the Plato that responds to the demands of a post-Cantorian set theory, and he considers Plato’s philosophy to provide a response to such a challenge. In effect, Badiou reorients mathematical Platonism from an epistemological to an ontological problematic, a move that relies on the plausibility of rejecting the empiricist ontology underlying orthodox mathematical Platonism. To draw a connec- tion between these two approaches to Platonism and to determine what sets them radically apart, this paper focuses on the use that they each make of model theory to further their respective arguments. (shrink)