Inner models with large cardinal features usually obtained by forcing

Archive for Mathematical Logic 51 (3-4):257-283 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We construct a variety of inner models exhibiting features usually obtained by forcing over universes with large cardinals. For example, if there is a supercompact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a Laver indestructible supercompact cardinal. If there is a supercompact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a supercompact cardinal κ for which 2κ = κ+, another for which 2κ = κ++ and another in which the least strongly compact cardinal is supercompact. If there is a strongly compact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a strongly compact cardinal, for which the measurable cardinals are bounded below it and another inner model W with a strongly compact cardinal κ, such that \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${H^{V}_{\kappa^+} \subseteq {\rm HOD}^W}$$\end{document}. Similar facts hold for supercompact, measurable and strongly Ramsey cardinals. If a cardinal is supercompact up to a weakly iterable cardinal, then there is an inner model of the Proper Forcing Axiom and another inner model with a supercompact cardinal in which GCH + V = HOD holds. Under the same hypothesis, there is an inner model with level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness, and indeed, another in which there is level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness. If a cardinal is strongly compact up to a weakly iterable cardinal, then there is an inner model in which the least measurable cardinal is strongly compact. If there is a weakly iterable limit δ of <δ-supercompact cardinals, then there is an inner model with a proper class of Laver-indestructible supercompact cardinals. We describe three general proof methods, which can be used to prove many similar results.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 97,319

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
97 (#185,101)

6 months
10 (#592,147)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

Bi-interpretation in weak set theories.Alfredo Roque Freire & Joel David Hamkins - 2021 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 86 (2):609-634.
On the consistency strength of level by level inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2017 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 56 (7-8):715-723.
Level by level inequivalence beyond measurability.Arthur W. Apter - 2011 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 50 (7-8):707-712.
Equivalence relations which are borel somewhere.William Chan - 2017 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 82 (3):893-930.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The lottery preparation.Joel David Hamkins - 2000 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 101 (2-3):103-146.
The Ground Axiom.Jonas Reitz - 2007 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 (4):1299 - 1317.
Internal consistency and the inner model hypothesis.Sy-David Friedman - 2006 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 12 (4):591-600.
Ramsey-like cardinals.Victoria Gitman - 2011 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 76 (2):519 - 540.

View all 15 references / Add more references