In this paper, we consider Foreman’s maximality principle, which says that any nontrivial forcing notion either adds a new real or collapses some cardinals. We prove the consistency of some of its consequences. We observe that it is consistent that every c.c.c. forcing adds a real and that for every uncountable regular cardinal κ, every κ-closed forcing of size 2<κ collapses some cardinal.

Given a Polish group G, let $E(G)$ be the right coset equivalence relation $G^{\omega }/c(G)$, where $c(G)$ is the group of all convergent sequences in G. The connected component of the identity of a Polish group G is denoted by $G_0$.

Let $G,H$ be locally compact abelian Polish groups. If $E(G)\leq _B E(H)$, then there is a continuous homomorphism $S:G_0\rightarrow H_0$ such that $\ker (S)$ is non-archimedean. The converse is also true when G is connected and compact.

For $n\in {\mathbb {N}}^+$, the partially ordered set $P(\omega )/\mbox {Fin}$ can be embedded into Borel equivalence relations between $E({\mathbb {R}}^n)$ and $E({\mathbb {T}}^n)$.

Any intermediate propositional logic (i.e., a logic including intuitionistic logic and contained in classical logic) can be extended to a calculus with epsilon- and tau-operators and critical formulas. For classical logic, this results in Hilbert’s $\varepsilon $ -calculus. The first and second $\varepsilon $ -theorems for classical logic establish conservativity of the $\varepsilon $ -calculus over its classical base logic. It is well known that the second $\varepsilon $ -theorem fails for the intuitionistic $\varepsilon $ -calculus, as prenexation is impossible. The paper investigates the effect of adding critical $\varepsilon $ - and $\tau $ -formulas and using the translation of quantifiers into $\varepsilon $ - and $\tau $ -terms to intermediate logics. It is shown that conservativity over the propositional base logic also holds for such intermediate ${\varepsilon \tau }$ -calculi. The “extended” first $\varepsilon $ -theorem holds if the base logic is finite-valued Gödel–Dummett logic, and fails otherwise, but holds for certain provable formulas in infinite-valued Gödel logic. The second $\varepsilon $ -theorem also holds for finite-valued first-order Gödel logics. The methods used to prove the extended first $\varepsilon $ -theorem for infinite-valued Gödel logic suggest applications to theories of arithmetic.

Generalizing the notion of a tight almost disjoint family, we introduce the notions of a tight eventually different family of functions in Baire space and a tight eventually different set of permutations of $\omega $. Such sets strengthen maximality, exist under $\mathsf {MA} (\sigma \mathrm {-centered})$ and come with a properness preservation theorem. The notion of tightness also generalizes earlier work on the forcing indestructibility of maximality of families of functions. As a result we compute the cardinals $\mathfrak {a}_e$ and $\mathfrak {a}_p$ in many known models by giving explicit witnesses and therefore obtain the consistency of several constellations of cardinal characteristics of the continuum including $\mathfrak {a}_e = \mathfrak {a}_p = \mathfrak {d} < \mathfrak {a}_T$, $\mathfrak {a}_e = \mathfrak {a}_p < \mathfrak {d} = \mathfrak {a}_T$, $\mathfrak {a}_e = \mathfrak {a}_p =\mathfrak {i} < \mathfrak {u}$, and $\mathfrak {a}_e=\mathfrak {a}_p = \mathfrak {a} < non(\mathcal N) = cof(\mathcal N)$. We also show that there are $\Pi ^1_1$ tight eventually different families and tight eventually different sets of permutations in L thus obtaining the above inequalities alongside $\Pi ^1_1$ witnesses for $\mathfrak {a}_e = \mathfrak {a}_p = \aleph _1$.

Moreover, we prove that tight eventually different families are Cohen indestructible and are never analytic.

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.

In the study of categories whose morphisms display a behaviour similar to that of partial functions, the concept of morphism domain is, obviously, central. In this paper an operation defined on morphisms describes those properties which are related to morphisms being regarded as abstractions of partial functions. This operation allows us to characterise the morphism domains directly, and gives rise to an algebra defined by a simple set of identities. No product-like categorical structures are needed therefore. We also develop the construction of topologies together with the notion of continuous morphism, in order to test the effectiveness of this approach. It is interesting to see how much of the computational character of the morphisms is translated into continuity.

Each Girard quantale (i.e., commutative quantale with a selected dualizing element) provides a support for a semantics for linear propositional formulas (but not for linear derivations). Several constructions of Girard quantales are known. We give two more constructions, one using an arbitrary partially ordered monoid and one using a partially ordered group (both commutative). In both cases the semantics can be controlled be a relation between pairs of elements of the support and formulas. This gives us a neat way of handling duality.

The purpose of this paper is to study logical implications which are much weaker than the implication of intuitionistic logic.

In §1 we define the system SI (system of Simple Implication) which is obtained from intuitionistic logic by restricting the inference rules of intuitionistic implication. The implication of the system SI is called the “simple implication” and denoted by ⊃, where the simple implication ⊃ has the following properties:

(1) The simple implication ⊃ is much weaker than the usual intuitionistic implication.

(2) The simple implication ⊃ can be interpreted by the notion of provability, i.e., we have a very simple semantics for SI so that a sentence A ⊃ B is interpreted as “there exists a proof of B from A”.

(3) The full-strength intuitionistic implication ⇒ is definable in a weak second order extension of SI; in other words, it is definable by help of a variant of the weak comprehension schema and the simple implication ⊃. Therefore, though SI is much weaker than the intuitionistic logic, the second order extension of SI is equivalent to the second order extension of the intuitionistic logic.

(4) The simple implication is definable in a weak modal logic MI by the use of the modal operator and the intuitionistic implication ⇒ with full strength. More precisely, A ⊃ B is defined as the strict implication of the form ◽(A ⇒ B).

In §1, we show (3) and (4). (2) is shown in §2 in a more general setting.

Semantics by introduction rules of logical connectives has been studied from various points of view by many authors (e.g. Gentzen [4], Lorentzen [5], Dummett [1], [2], Prawitz [8]. Martin-Löf [7], Maehara [6]). Among them Gentzen (in §§10 and 11 of [4]) introduced such a semantics in order to justify logical inferences and the mathematical induction rule. He observed that all of the inference rules of intuitionistic arithmetic, except for those on implication and negation, are justified by means of his semantics, but justification of the inference rules on implication and negation contains a circular argument for the interpretation by introduction rules, where the natural interpretation of A ⊃ B by ⊃-introduction rule is “there exists a proof of B from A ” (cf. §11 of Gentzen [4]).

If is a pseudo-variety, then a supersimple residually group is nilpotent-by-poly-.

Let T be a recursively enumerable theory extending Elementary Arithmetic EA. L. D. Beklemishev proved that the Σ2 local reflection principle for T, (T), is conservative over the Σ1 local reflection principle, (T), with respect to boolean combinations of Σ1-sentences; and asked whether this result is best possible. In this work we answer Beklemishev's question by showing that Π2-sentences are not conserved for T = EA + “f is total,” where f is any nondecreasing computable function with elementary graph. We also discuss how this result generalizes to n > 0 and obtain as an application that for n > 0, is conservative over IΣn with respect to Πn+2-sentences.

A dilator D is a functor from ON to itself commuting with direct limits and pull-backs. A dilator D is a flower iff D(x) is continuous. A flower F is regular iff F(x) is strictly increasing and F(f)(F(z)) = F(f(z)) (for f ϵ ON(x,y), z ϵ X).

Equalization is the following axiom: if F, G ϵ Flr (class of regular flowers), then there is an H ϵ Flr such that F ° H = G ° H. From this we can deduce that if ℱ is a set ⊆ Flr, then there is an H ϵ Flr which is the smallest equalizer of ℱ (it can be said that H equalizes ℱ iff for every F, G ϵ ℱ we have F ° H = G ° H). Equalization is not provable in set theory because equalization for denumerable flowers is equivalent to -determinacy (see a forthcoming paper by Girard and Kechris).

Therefore it is interesting to effectively find, by elementary means, equalizers even in the simplest cases. The aim of this paper is to prove Girard and Kechris's conjecture: “ is the (smallest) equalizer for Flr < ω” (where Flr < ω denotes the set of finite regular flowers). We will verify that is an equalizer of Flr < ω; we will sketch the proof that it is the smallest one at the end of the paper. We will denote by H.

We combine a variety of constructive methods (including forcing, realizability, asymmetric interpretation), to obtain consistency results concerning combinatory logic with extensionality and (forms of) the axiom of choice.