Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T13:47:24.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There may be infinitely many near-coherence classes under u < ∂

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Heike Mildenberger
Heike Mildenberger*
Affiliation:
Universität Wien, Kurt Gödel Research Center for Mathematical Logic, Währinger Str. 25 1090 Vienna, Austria. E-Mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We show that in the models of u < ∂ from [14] there are infinitely many near-coherence classes of ultrafilters, thus answering Banakh's and Blass' Question 30 of [3] negatively. By an unpublished result of Canjar, there are at least two classes in these models.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 72 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 1228 - 1238
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2007

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]Aubrey, Jason, Combinatorics for the dominating and the unsplitting numbers, this Journal, vol. 69 (2004), pp. 482–498.Google Scholar
[2]Balcar, Bohuslav and Simon, Petr, On minimal π-character of points in extremally disconnected compact spaces. Topology audits Applications, vol. 41 (1991), pp. 133–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Banakh, Taras and Blass, Andreas, The number of near-coherence classes of ultrafilters is either finite or 2c, Set theory (Bagaria, Joan and Todorcevic, Stevo, editors), Trends in Mathematics, Birkhäuser, 2006, pp. 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Blass, Andreas, Combinatorial cardinal characteristics of the continuum, Handbook of set theory (Foreman, Matthew, Kanamori, Akihiro, and Magidor, Menachem, editors), Kluwer, to appear, available at http://www.math.Isa.umich.edu/~ablass.Google Scholar
[5]Blass, Andreas, Near coherence of filters, I: Cofinal equivalence of models of arithmetic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 27 (1986), pp. 579–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Blass, Andreas, Near coherence of filters. II: Applications to operator ideals, the Stone-Čech remainder of a half-line, order ideals of sequences, and slenderness of groups, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 300 (1987), pp. 557–581.Google Scholar
[7]Blass, Andreas, Ultrafilters related to Hindman's finite unions theorem and its extensions. Logic and combinatorics (Simpson, S., editor), Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 65, American Mathematical Society, 1987, pp. 89–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Blass, Andreas, Applications of superperfect forcing and its relatives, Set theory and its applications (Steprâns, Juris and Watson, Steve, editors). Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1401, 1989, pp. 18–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Blass, Andreas, Groupwise density and related cardinals, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 30 (1990), pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
[10]Blass, Andreas and Laflamme, Claude, Consistency results about filters and the number of inequivalent growth types, this Journal, vol. 54 (1989), pp. 50–56.Google Scholar
[11]Blass, Andreas and Mildenberger, Heike, On the cofinality of ultrapowers, this Journal, vol. 64 (1999), pp. 727–736.Google Scholar
[12]Blass, Andreas and Shelah, Saharon, There may be simple Pℵ1 - and Pℵ2-points and the Rudin-Keisler ordering may be downward directed, Annals Pure Applied Logic, vol. 33 (1987), pp. 213–243, [BsSh:242].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Blass, Andreas, Near coherence of filters III: A simplified consistency proof, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 30 (1989), pp. 530–538, [BsSh:287].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Blass, Andreas, Ultrafilters with small generating sets, Israel Journal Mathematics, vol. 65 (1989), pp. 259–271, [BsSh:257].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Brendle, Jörg, Distinguishing groupwise density numbers, 2006, to appear in Monatshefte für Mathematik.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Canjar, Michael, Cofinalities of countable ultraproducts: The existence theorem, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 30 (1989), pp. 309–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Canjar, R. Michael, Mathias forcing which does not add dominating reals, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 104 (1988), pp. 1239–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Eisworth, Todd, Forcing and stable ordered-union ultrafilters, this Journal, vol. 67 (2002), pp. 449–464.Google Scholar
[19]Ketonen, Jussi, On the existence of P-points in the Stone-Čech compactification of integers, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 92 (1976), pp. 91–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Mildenberger, Heike, Groupwise dense families, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 40 (2000), pp. 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Mioduszewski, Jerzy, On composants of βR – R, Proceedings conf. topology and measure (Zinnowitz 1974) (Flachsmeyer, J., Frolík, Z., and Terpe, F., editors), Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität zu Greifswald, 1978, pp. 257–283.Google Scholar
[22]Mioduszewski, Jerzy, Anapproach toβR–R, Topology (Császár, Á., editor), Colloquia Mathematica Societatis János Bolyai, vol. 23, North-Holland, 1980, pp. 853–854.Google Scholar
[23]Nyikos, Peter, Special ultrafilters and cofinal subsets of ωω, 1984, preprint.Google Scholar
[24]Solomon, R. C., Families of sets and functions, Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal, vol. 27 (1977), pp. 556–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar