A Sharp for the Chang Model

Similar documents
A Sharp for the Chang Model

Large Cardinals and Higher Degree Theory

Cardinal Preserving Elementary Embeddings

Forcing axioms and inner models

A variant of Namba Forcing

Forcing Axioms and Inner Models of Set Theory

An inner model from Ω-logic. Daisuke Ikegami

Inner models from extended logics

Projective well-orderings of the reals and forcing axioms

DO FIVE OUT OF SIX ON EACH SET PROBLEM SET

SINGULAR COFINALITY CONJECTURE AND A QUESTION OF GORELIC. 1. introduction

FORCING WITH SEQUENCES OF MODELS OF TWO TYPES

MAGIC Set theory. lecture 6

A Note on Singular Cardinals in Set Theory without Choice

ITERATING ALONG A PRIKRY SEQUENCE

EQUICONSISTENCIES AT SUBCOMPACT CARDINALS

Löwenheim-Skolem Theorems, Countable Approximations, and L ω. David W. Kueker (Lecture Notes, Fall 2007)

Optimal generic absoluteness results from strong cardinals

COLLAPSING FUNCTIONS

The Ultrapower Axiom implies GCH above a supercompact cardinal

VARIATIONS FOR SEPARATING CLUB GUESSING PRINCIPLES

Increasing δ 1 2 and Namba-style forcing

The constructible universe

The Vaught Conjecture Do uncountable models count?

Unsolvable problems, the Continuum Hypothesis, and the nature of infinity

THE TREE PROPERTY AND THE FAILURE OF THE SINGULAR CARDINAL HYPOTHESIS AT ℵ ω 2

Introduction to Model Theory

Successive cardinals with the tree property

Descriptive inner model theory

Disjoint n-amalgamation

arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 7 Dec 2017

ITERATIONS WITH MIXED SUPPORT

Jónsson Properties for Non-Ordinal Sets Under the Axiom of Determinacy

The choice of ω 1 and combinatorics at ℵ ω

Gödel s Programm and Ultimate L

A NOTE ON THE EIGHTFOLD WAY

October 12, Complexity and Absoluteness in L ω1,ω. John T. Baldwin. Measuring complexity. Complexity of. concepts. to first order.

Violating the Singular Cardinals Hypothesis Without Large Cardinals

2.2 Some Consequences of the Completeness Axiom

In N we can do addition, but in order to do subtraction we need to extend N to the integers

Lecture 11: Minimal types

AMS regional meeting Bloomington, IN April 1, 2017

Part II Logic and Set Theory

Singular Failures of GCH and Level by Level Equivalence

ALL UNCOUNTABLE CARDINALS IN THE GITIK MODEL ARE ALMOST RAMSEY AND CARRY ROWBOTTOM FILTERS

Outer Model Satisfiability. M.C. (Mack) Stanley San Jose State

Violating the Singular Cardinals Hypothesis Without Large Cardinals

NAM TRANG TREVOR WILSON. September 16, 2016

TOPICS IN SET THEORY: Example Sheet 2

THE TREE PROPERTY AT ℵ ω+1 DIMA SINAPOVA

Statue of Aristotle at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

On the Length of Borel Hierarchies

Generalizing Gödel s Constructible Universe:

Set Theory and the Foundation of Mathematics. June 19, 2018

The length-ω 1 open game quantifier propagates scales

Harvard CS 121 and CSCI E-207 Lecture 6: Regular Languages and Countability

On Recognizable Languages of Infinite Pictures

Forcing notions in inner models

MATHEMATICS: CONCEPTS, AND FOUNDATIONS Vol. II - Model Theory - H. Jerome Keisler

CHAPTER 8: EXPLORING R

Set-theoretic potentialism and the universal finite set

SET MAPPING REFLECTION

SELF-DUAL UNIFORM MATROIDS ON INFINITE SETS

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

The axiom of choice and two-point sets in the plane

CANONICALIZATION BY ABSOLUTENESS

In N we can do addition, but in order to do subtraction we need to extend N to the integers

Semi-stationary reflection and weak square

ADVANCED CALCULUS - MTH433 LECTURE 4 - FINITE AND INFINITE SETS

HIERARCHIES OF FORCING AXIOMS II

Combinatorial dichotomies and cardinal invariants

Six lectures on the stationary tower

Tutorial 1.3: Combinatorial Set Theory. Jean A. Larson (University of Florida) ESSLLI in Ljubljana, Slovenia, August 4, 2011

Cardinal preserving elementary embeddings

Trees and generic absoluteness

Handout 2 (Correction of Handout 1 plus continued discussion/hw) Comments and Homework in Chapter 1

FRAGILITY AND INDESTRUCTIBILITY II

Diamond, non-saturation, and weak square principles

Chain Conditions of Horn and Tarski

Computability theory and uncountable structures

A simple maximality principle

Mathematics-I Prof. S.K. Ray Department of Mathematics and Statistics Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. Lecture 1 Real Numbers

Scott Sentences in Uncountable Structures

COMPLETE NORMALITY AND COUNTABLE COMPACTNESS

An introduction to OCA

Inner models and ultrafilters in

THE STRONG TREE PROPERTY AND THE FAILURE OF SCH

Forcing with matrices of countable elementary submodels

A NEW LINDELOF SPACE WITH POINTS G δ

arxiv: v2 [math.lo] 16 Oct 2015

The Seed Order. Gabriel Goldberg. October 8, 2018

INNER MODELS AND ULTRAFILTERS IN L(R).

On the Length of Borel Hierarchies

ANDRÉS EDUARDO CAICEDO, PAUL LARSON, GRIGOR SARGSYAN, RALF SCHINDLER, JOHN STEEL, AND MARTIN ZEMAN

Denition 2: o() is the height of the well-founded relation. Notice that we must have o() (2 ) +. Much is known about the possible behaviours of. For e

Tallness and Level by Level Equivalence and Inequivalence

SOME TRANSFINITE INDUCTION DEDUCTIONS

GREGORY TREES, THE CONTINUUM, AND MARTIN S AXIOM

Inner model theoretic geology

IDEAL PROJECTIONS AND FORCING PROJECTIONS

Transcription:

A Sharp for the Chang Model William Mitchell wjm@ufl.edu University of Florida February 19, 2011 Inner Model Theory & Large Cardinals A 50 Year Celebration Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 1 / 22

Outline 1 What is the Chang Model C? 2 Introducing the Sharp 3 A Sketch of the Proof Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 2 / 22

2011-02-21 A Sharp for the Chang Model Outline Outline 1 What is the Chang Model C? 2 Introducing the Sharp 3 A Sketch of the Proof These are the slides which I used for my talk at the MAMLS meeting at Harvard University, Inner Model Theory & Large Cardinals A 50 Year Celebration on February 19, 2011. I have corrected (but not, I believe, all) of the typos and have added some notes. The forcing used in this paper is based on that of Gitik in his proof of the independence of the SCH. The argument that a generic set for the forcing can be constructed using the indiscernibles coming from the iteration is based on work of Carmi Merimovich.

Definition Definition The Chang model C is the smallest model of ZF containing the ordinals and containing all of its countable subsets. It can be obtained by modifying the definition of L at ordinals α of cofinality ω: C α+1 = Def Cα [α]<ω1 (C α [α] <ω 1 ), Or (following Chang) use the infinitary logic L ω1,ω: C α+1 = Def Cα L ω1,ω (C α). Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 3 / 22

Simple Observations R C, and hence L(R) C. C satisfies DC (Dependent choice), and any integer game decided in V is decided in C. Any member of C is definable in C by using a countable sequence of ordinals as a parameter. [C] <ω 1 C If [M] <ω 1 M and the ordinals are contained in M, then C M = C. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 4 / 22

Examples C L = L. 0 = C = L([ω 2 ] ω ). In L[U], let i U ω : L[U] Ult ω (L, U) = L[U ω ]. Then C L[U] = L[U ω ][ i U n (κ) n < ω ] = L[ i U n (κ) n < ω ] and HOD CL[U] = L[U ω ]. The point is that U ω can be reconstructed from its Prikry sequence i U n (κ) n ω, which is countable. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 5 / 22

Examples, continued With more measures, we have the theorem of Kunen: Theorem (Kunen) If there are uncountably many measurable cardinals, then the Axiom of Choice is false in C. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 6 / 22

Examples, continued Nevertheless, if V = L[U] for a sequence U of measures then C = L[an iterate of U]({all countable sequences of critical points}) = L[({all countable sequences of critical points}) HOD C is an iterate of L[U]. and if K = L[U] then, by the covering lemma, C = L([ω 2 ] ω )({countable sequences of critical points}). Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 7 / 22

Where does this fail? Woodin gave an upper bound: Theorem (Woodin) If there is a measurable Woodin cardinal, then there is a sharp for the Chang model. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 8 / 22

What this means There is a closed, unbounded class I of ordinals such that the following holds: Say B I is suitable if Then B is closed and countable, and every successor member of B either is a successor point of I or has uncountable cofinality. If B and B are suitable and have the same length, then C = (φ(b) φ(b )) for all formulas φ. The theory of C (with parameters for suitable sets) is fixed. There are Skolem functions (not in C) such that C is the hull of R and [I ] <ω 1. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 9 / 22

Question Question (Woodin) With only measurable cardinals, K HODC is an iterate of K. With a measurable Woodin cardinal, we have a sharp for C. What happens inside this large gap? Does HOD C continue to be an iterate of K C? When Woodin asked this in a conversation at the Mittag-Leffler Institute, James Cummings and Ralf Schindler stated that arguments of Gitik suggested that this would break down at o(κ) = κ +ω. I demurred, thinking that this situation was different. I was wrong. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 10 / 22

2011-02-21 A Sharp for the Chang Model Introducing the Sharp Question Question Question (Woodin) With only measurable cardinals, K HODC is an iterate of K. With a measurable Woodin cardinal, we have a sharp for C. What happens inside this large gap? Does HOD C continue to be an iterate of K C? When Woodin asked this in a conversation at the Mittag-Leffler Institute, James Cummings and Ralf Schindler stated that arguments of Gitik suggested that this would break down at o(κ) = κ +ω. I demurred, thinking that this situation was different. I was wrong. Note: Woodin observes that with some large cardinal strength we have HOD C = K C, so it is not necessary to specify K HODC in the next slide. I do not think that this is true at the level of measurable cardinals. However the main point is that C has all the large cardinal strength of V.

First, Pushing the Lower Bounds An argument due to Gitik allows extenders of length less than κ +ω to be reconstructed from their indiscernibles. Hence K HODC is an iterate of K if there is no extender of length κ +ω. This can easily be extended to no extender of length κ +ω+1. This breaks down at an extender of length κ +(ω+1) (calculated in a mouse before the extender is added).. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 11 / 22

A Conjecture... Conjecture Suppose that M = L α (R)[E] is the least mouse over the reals such that E has a last extender E of length κ +(ω+1). Then M is a sharp for C. Note that M projects onto R by a Σ 1 function In particular, if M satisfies the CH then M = ω 1. Hence all the cardinal calculations will be made in M (0r iterates of M) below the final extender. It may well be that the extender E should survive for a few levels of construction after E is added. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 12 / 22

A Bit of Explaination... 0, the sharp for L, can be viewed in (at least) three ways: A closed proper class I = { ι n ν Ω } of indiscernibles for L, such that every member of L is definable with parameters from [I ] <ω. The theory of (L, ι n ) n ω. The least model M = L κ+1 [U] satisfying that U is a measure on κ. Then M is countable, and ι ν = { i U ν ν Ω }. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 13 / 22

A Bit of Explaination... That E is an extender of length (κ +(ω+1) ) M means that P ω+1 (κ) M and Ult(M, E) = { i E (f )(ν) f M & ν [κ, κ +(ω+1) }. Thus, if M Ω = Ult Ω (M, E) then every member of M can be written i Ω (f )(a) for some f M and a { [ iν (κ), i ν (κ +(ω+1) ) ) } ν Ω. Thus, since ω M M, the Chang model C can be obtained by adding every countable subset of { [ i ν (κ), i ν (κ +(ω+1) ) ) ν Ω }. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 14 / 22

An Upper bound Theorem Suppose that M = L α (R)[E] is a mouse over the the reals with a last extender E of length κ +ω 1. Then there is a sharp for the Chang model C. I will try to outline some ideas of the proof. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 15 / 22

For simplicity, we will assume that M = CH. If not, then we could begin with a generic collapse of R onto ω 1. Let M Ω = Ult Ω (M, E) be the class iteration of M (with the top extender stripped off). Let I be the set of critical points of i E Ω : M M Ω. If B is suitable, then let M B M Ω be the Skolem hull in M Ω of members of (and indiscernibles belonging to members of) B. If δ + 1 = otp(b) and B is the set containing the first δ + 1 members of I, then M B = Ult δ (M, E) = M B (with the top extender i δ (E) cut off). Let C B be the Chang model in the model obtained by closing M B under countable sequences. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 16 / 22

Some Observations If B = { ι ξ : ξ δ } is the first δ + 1 members of I then M B is transitive. C B = C α where α = Ord(M B ). and C B can be obtained from M B by Start with M B. Add { all further countable threads, } i.e., the sets of the form i 1 ξ,δ (ν) ν < δ & β a for a [ [ι, ι +ω 1 ) ] <ω 1. The result of this step will contain all of its countable subsets, since M = M 0 contains all of its countable subsets. Then C as defined inside this model is C B. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 17 / 22

i ( E) ν Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model g e n e r a t o r so fi ( E) ν Harvard MAMLS 18 / 22

More Observations Proposition [Ω] ω B C B. C B = ZF + V = C. If B and B have the same order type, then C B = CB. Lemma (Main Lemma) If B B then C B C B. Corollary C = B C B and all the rest. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 19 / 22

2011-02-21 A Sharp for the Chang Model A Sketch of the Proof More Observations More Observations Proposition [Ω] ω B CB. CB = ZF + V = C. If B and B have the same order type, then CB = CB. Lemma (Main Lemma) If B B then CB CB. Corollary C = B CB and all the rest. The crucial point is that this consideration allows us to deal directly only with countable iterations. This is important because the forcing I describe only works for countably many indiscernibles.

Proof of Main Lemma We can assume B is the first δ members of I for some countable δ: B = { ι ν ν < δ } B = { ι σ(ν) ν < δ }. Where σ : δ δ is continuous, strictly increasing, and maps successor ordinals to sucessor ordinals. We want to define a forcing P in M B, and a M B -generic set G V, so that C M B [G] = C B. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 20 / 22

Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 21 / 22

2011-02-21 A Sharp for the Chang Model A Sketch of the Proof Perhaps some more explaination of this diagram should be given. The point is that we want to take threads from the actual iteration (labeled at β 0 in the picture and introduce them into the forcing. We can t do so directly for one thing, E is not in the model MB and so can t be used in the forcing. We simply assign the thread to an arbitrary ordinal β less than κ+. However MB does require some guidance for its forcing. We follow Gitik in having MB regard the νth element of the thread as assigned to an ordinal β 00 in a model Nν MB, using the extender Eν = E Nν (which is a member of MB ). However (still following Gitik) it is necessary to introduce an ambiguity since β 00 can t be fully like β 0. This is done by using an equivalence relation on the conditions. Note that h Nν ν < δ i is a member of MB, but h Nν ν < ω1 i is not indeed its union is probably all of MB.

We start by defining a chain N ν ν ω 1 in V with N ν? N ν? (M, E) κ +ν N ν N ν N ν N γ N γ for each γ < ω 1. N γ M for each γ < ω 1. Mitchell (University of Florida) A Sharp for the Chang Model Harvard MAMLS 22 / 22