Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic

Inaccessible Cardinals, Failures of GCH, and Level-by-Level Equivalence

Arthur W. Apter

Full-text: Access denied (no subscription detected)

We're sorry, but we are unable to provide you with the full text of this article because we are not able to identify you as a subscriber. If you have a personal subscription to this journal, then please login. If you are already logged in, then you may need to update your profile to register your subscription. Read more about accessing full-text

Abstract

We construct models for the level-by-level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness containing failures of the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis (GCH) at inaccessible cardinals. In one of these models, no cardinal is supercompact up to an inaccessible cardinal, and for every inaccessible cardinal δ, 2δ>δ++. In another of these models, no cardinal is supercompact up to an inaccessible cardinal, and the only inaccessible cardinals at which GCH holds are also measurable. These results extend and generalize earlier work of the author.

Article information

Source
Notre Dame J. Formal Logic, Volume 55, Number 4 (2014), 431-444.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 7 November 2014

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1415382950

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1215/00294527-2798691

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3276406

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1335.03044

Subjects
Primary: 03E35: Consistency and independence results 03E55: Large cardinals

Keywords
supercompact cardinal strongly compact cardinal inaccessible cardinal generalized continuum hypothesis level-by-level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness

Citation

Apter, Arthur W. Inaccessible Cardinals, Failures of GCH, and Level-by-Level Equivalence. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 55 (2014), no. 4, 431--444. doi:10.1215/00294527-2798691. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1415382950


Export citation

References

  • [1] Apter, A. W., “Some structural results concerning supercompact cardinals,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 66 (2001), pp. 1919–27.
  • [2] Apter, A. W., “On level by level equivalence and inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness,” Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 171 (2002), pp. 77–92.
  • [3] Apter, A. W., “Supercompactness and measurable limits of strong cardinals, II: Applications to level by level equivalence,” Mathematical Logic Quarterly, vol. 52 (2006), pp. 457–63.
  • [4] Apter, A. W., and S. Shelah, “Menas’ result is best possible,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 349 (1997), pp. 2007–34.
  • [5] Apter, A. W., and S. Shelah, “On the strong equality between supercompactness and strong compactness,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 349 (1997), pp. 103–28.
  • [6] Hamkins, J. D., “Gap forcing: Generalizing the Lévy-Solovay theorem,” Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 5 (1999), pp. 264–72.
  • [7] Hamkins, J. D., “Gap forcing,” Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 125 (2001), pp. 237–52.
  • [8] Kanamori, A., The Higher Infinite: Large Cardinals in Set Theory from Their Beginnings, 2nd ed., Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 2003.
  • [9] Kimchi, Y., and M. Magidor, “The independence between the concepts of compactness and supercompactness,” preprint.
  • [10] Levinski, J.-P., “Filters and large cardinals,” Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 72 (1995), pp. 177–212.
  • [11] Lévy, A., and R. M. Solovay, “Measurable cardinals and the continuum hypothesis,” Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 5 (1967), pp. 234–48.
  • [12] Magidor, M., “On the existence of nonregular ultrafilters and the cardinality of ultrapowers,” Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 249 (1979), pp. 97–111.
  • [13] Menas, T. K., “On strong compactness and supercompactness,” Annals of Mathematical Logic. vol. 7 (1974/75), pp. 327–59.