Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 March 2014
We consider various versions of the ♣ principle. This principle is a known consequence of ◊. It is well known that ◊ is not sensitive to minor changes in its definition, e.g., changing the guessing requirement form “guessing exactly” to “guessing modulo a finite set”. We show however, that this is not true for ♣. We consider some other variants of ♣ as well.
Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.