On certain indestructibility of strong cardinals and a question of Hajnal

&
Archive for Mathematical Logic 28 (1):35-42 (1989)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A model in which strongness ofκ is indestructible under κ+ -weakly closed forcing notions satisfying the Prikry condition is constructed. This is applied to solve a question of Hajnal on the number of elements of {λ δ |2 δ <λ}

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/bf01624081

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,881

External links

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

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Some remarks on indestructibility and Hamkins? lottery preparation.Arthur W. Apter - 2003 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 42 (8):717-735.
On the indestructibility aspects of identity crisis.Grigor Sargsyan - 2009 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 48 (6):493-513.
Indestructibility, instances of strong compactness, and level by level inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2010 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 49 (7-8):725-741.
Strongly unfoldable cardinals made indestructible.Thomas A. Johnstone - 2008 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 73 (4):1215-1248.
Independence of strong partition relation for small cardinals, and the free-subset problem.Saharon Shelah - 1980 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 45 (3):505-509.
Universal indestructibility for degrees of supercompactness and strongly compact cardinals.Arthur W. Apter & Grigor Sargsyan - 2008 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 47 (2):133-142.
Supercompactness and level by level equivalence are compatible with indestructibility for strong compactness.Arthur W. Apter - 2007 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 46 (3-4):155-163.
Extender based forcings.Moti Gitik & Menachem Magidor - 1994 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 59 (2):445-460.
Sacks forcing, Laver forcing, and Martin's axiom.Haim Judah, Arnold W. Miller & Saharon Shelah - 1992 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 31 (3):145-161.
Universal partial indestructibility and strong compactness.Arthur W. Apter - 2005 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (5):524-531.
An equiconsistency for universal indestructibility.Arthur W. Apter & Grigor Sargsyan - 2010 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 75 (1):314-322.
Fragility and indestructibility of the tree property.Spencer Unger - 2012 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 51 (5-6):635-645.
Strong Cardinals can be Fully Laver Indestructible.Arthur W. Apter - 2002 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 48 (4):499-507.
Indestructibility of Vopěnka’s Principle.Andrew D. Brooke-Taylor - 2011 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 50 (5-6):515-529.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-23

Downloads
32 (#499,789)

6 months
7 (#430,521)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

The lottery preparation.Joel David Hamkins - 2000 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 101 (2-3):103-146.
Reflecting stationary sets and successors of singular cardinals.Saharon Shelah - 1991 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 31 (1):25-53.
Tall cardinals.Joel D. Hamkins - 2009 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 55 (1):68-86.

View all 49 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Between strong and superstrong.Stewart Baldwin - 1986 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 51 (3):547-559.
Some notes on iterated forcing with $2^{\aleph0}>\aleph2$. [REVIEW]Saharon Shelah - 1987 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 29 (1):1-17.

Add more references