The lottery preparation

Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 101 (2-3):103-146 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The lottery preparation, a new general kind of Laver preparation, works uniformly with supercompact cardinals, strongly compact cardinals, strong cardinals, measurable cardinals, or what have you. And like the Laver preparation, the lottery preparation makes these cardinals indestructible by various kinds of further forcing. A supercompact cardinal κ, for example, becomes fully indestructible by <κ-directed closed forcing; a strong cardinal κ becomes indestructible by κ-strategically closed forcing; and a strongly compact cardinal κ becomes indestructible by, among others, the forcing to add a Cohen subset to κ, the forcing to shoot a club Cκ avoiding the measurable cardinals and the forcing to add various long Prikry sequences. The lottery preparation works best when performed after fast function forcing, which adds a new completely general kind of Laver function for any large cardinal, thereby freeing the Laver function concept from the supercompact cardinal context

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

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

Some remarks on indestructibility and Hamkins? lottery preparation.Arthur W. Apter - 2003 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 42 (8):717-735.
Indestructible Strong Unfoldability.Joel David Hamkins & Thomas A. Johnstone - 2010 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):291-321.
What lottery problem for reliabilism?Juan Comesaña - 2009 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (1):1-20.
A Review of the Lottery Paradox.Gregory Wheeler - 2007 - In William Harper & Gregory Wheeler (eds.), Probability and Inference: Essays in Honour of Henry E. Kyburg, Jr. College Publications.
Safety, The Lottery Puzzle, and Misprinted Lottery Results.Mark McEvoy - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Research 34:47-49.
Fallibilism and the Lottery paradox.Baron Reed - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 53:217-225.
Lottery Dependent Utility: a Reexamination.Ulrich Schmidt - 2001 - Theory and Decision 50 (1):35-58.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-16

Downloads
54 (#282,416)

6 months
10 (#213,340)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Joel David Hamkins
Oxford University

Citations of this work

Set-theoretic geology.Gunter Fuchs, Joel David Hamkins & Jonas Reitz - 2015 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 166 (4):464-501.
Resurrection axioms and uplifting cardinals.Joel David Hamkins & Thomas A. Johnstone - 2014 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 53 (3-4):463-485.
Tall cardinals.Joel D. Hamkins - 2009 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 55 (1):68-86.

View all 59 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

On strong compactness and supercompactness.Telis K. Menas - 1975 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 7 (4):327-359.
Gap forcing: Generalizing the lévy-Solovay theorem.Joel David Hamkins - 1999 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):264-272.
Destruction or preservation as you like it.Joel David Hamkins - 1998 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 91 (2-3):191-229.

View all 15 references / Add more references