Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T20:54:03.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Properties of subtle cardinals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Claudia Henrion
Claudia Henrion*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont 05753
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Subtle cardinals were first introduced in a paper by Jensen and Kunen [JK]. They show that if κ is subtle then ◇κ holds. Subtle cardinals also play an important role in [B1], where Baumgartner proposed that certain large cardinal properties should be considered as properties of their associated normal ideals. He shows that in the case of ineffables, the ideals are particularly useful, as can be seen by the following theorem, κ is ineffable if and only if κ is subtle and Π½-indescribable and the subtle and Π½-indescribable ideals cohere, i.e. they generate a proper, normal ideal (which in fact turns out to be the ineffable ideal).

In this paper we examine properties of subtle cardinals and consider methods of forcing that destroy the property of subtlety while maintaining other properties. The following is a list of results.

1) We relativize the following two facts about subtle cardinals:

i) if κ is n-subtle then {α < κ: α is not n-subtle} is n-subtle, and

ii) if κ is (n + 1)-subtle then {α < κ: α is n-subtle} is in the (n + 1)-subtle filter to subsets of κ:

i′) if A is an n-subtle subset of κ then {α ϵ A: A ∩ α is not n-subtle} is n-subtle, and

ii′) if A is an (n + 1)-subtle subset of κ then {α ϵ A: A ∩ α is n-subtle} is (n + 1)-subtle.

2) We show that although a stationary limit of subtles is subtle, a subtle limit of subtles is not necessarily 2-subtle.

3) In §3 we use the technique of forcing to turn a subtle cardinal into a κ-Mahlo cardinal that is no longer subtle.

4) In §4 we extend the results of §3 by showing how to turn an (n + 1)-subtle cardinal into an n-subtle cardinal that is no longer (n + 1)-subtle.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 52 , Issue 4 , December 1987 , pp. 1005 - 1019
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[Bl]Baumgartner, James E., Ineffability properties of cardinals. I, Infinite and finite sets (Proceedings, Keszthely, 1973), Colloquia Mathematica Societatis János Bolyai, vol. 10, part I, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975, pp. 109–130.Google Scholar
[B2]Baumgartner, James E., Ineffability properties of cardinals. II, Logic, foundations of mathematics, and computability theory (Proceedings, London, Ontario, 1975; Butts, R. E. and Hintikka, J., editors), Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977, pp. 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[B3]Baumgartner, James E., Iterated forcing, Surveys in set theory (Mathias, A. R. D., editor), London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, no. 87, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1983, pp. 1–59.Google Scholar
[BTW]Baumgartner, James E., Taylor, Alan, and Wagon, Stanley, On splitting stationary subsequences of large cardinals, this Journal, vol. 42 (1977), pp. 203–214.Google Scholar
[Bo]Boos, William, Boolean extensions which efface the Mahlo property, this Journal, vol. 39 (1974), pp. 254–268.Google Scholar
[D]Drake, Frank R., Set theory: an introduction to large cardinals, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1974.Google Scholar
[J]Jech, Thomas, Set theory, Academic Press, New York, 1978.Google Scholar
[JK]Jensen, Ronald B. and Kunen, Kenneth, Some combinatorial properties of L and V, mimeographed notes.Google Scholar
[KM]Kanamori, Aki and Magidor, Menachem, The evolution of large cardinal axioms in set theory, Higher set theory (Proceedings, Oberwolfach, 1977), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 669, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978, pp. 99–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Kl]Kunen, Kenneth, Combinatorics, Handbook of mathematical logic (Barwise, J., editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977, pp. 371–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[K2]Kunen, Kenneth, Set theory: an introduction to independence proofs, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980.Google Scholar
[L]Levy, Azriel, Basic set theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[S]Shoenfield, J. R., Axioms of set theory, Handbook of mathematical logic (Barwise, J., editor), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977, pp. 321–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar