Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:28:58.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Supercompactness within the projective hierarchy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Howard Becker  and
Steve Jackson
Howard Becker
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA, E-mail: [email protected]
Steve Jackson
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203-5116, USA, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We show that all the projective ordinals are supercompact through their supremum and a ways beyond.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , June 2001 , pp. 658 - 672
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2001

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

[1]Becker, Howard, Determinacy implies that ℵ2 is supercompact, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 40 (1981), no. 3, pp. 229–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Becker, Howard, A property equivalent to the existence of scales, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 287 (1985), no. 2, pp. 591–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Harrington, L. and Kechris, A. S., On the determinacy of games on ordinals, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 20 (1981), pp. 109–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Jackson, Steve, Structural consequences of AD, in Handbook of Set Theory, to appear.Google Scholar
[5]Jackson, Steve, The weak square property, this volume.Google Scholar
[6]Jackson, Steve, AD and the projective ordinals, Cabal seminar 81–85, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1333, Springer, Berlin, 1988, pp. 117–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Jackson, Steve, AD and the very fine structure of L(ℝ), Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 21 (1989), no. 1, pp. 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Jackson, Steve, A computation of , Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 140 (1999), no. 670, pp. 1–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Kechris, Alexander S., AD and projective ordinals, Cabal seminar 76–77, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 689, Springer, Berlin, 1978, pp. 91–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Kechris, Alexander S. and Woodin, W. Hugh, Generic codes for uncountable ordinals, partition properties and elementary embeddings, Circulated manuscript, 1980.Google Scholar
[11]Martin, Donald A. and Steel, John, The extent of scales in L(ℝ), Cabal seminal 79–81, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1019, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Moschovakis, Yiannis N., Descriptive set theory, Studies in logic, vol. 100, North-Holland, 1980.Google Scholar
[13]Moschovakis, Yiannis N., Ordinal games and playful models, Cabal seminal 77–79, Lecture Notes in Mathematics. vol. 839, Springer, Berlin, 1981, pp. 169–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Steel, John R., Closure properties of pointclasses, Cabal seminar 77–79, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 839, Springer, Berlin, 1981, pp. 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Steel, John R., Scales in L(ℝ), Cabal seminar 79–81, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1019, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 107–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Woodin, W. Hugh, AD and the uniqueness of the supercompact measures on , Cabal seminar 79–81, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1019, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar