Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

AXIOM I0 AND HIGHER DEGREE THEORY

  • XIANGHUI SHI (a1)
Abstract

In this paper, we analyze structures of Zermelo degrees via a list of four degree theoretic questions (see §2) in various fine structure extender models, or under large cardinal assumptions. In particular we give a detailed analysis of the structures of Zermelo degrees in the Mitchell model for ω many measurable cardinals. It turns out that there is a profound correlation between the complexity of the degree structures at countable cofinality singular cardinals and the large cardinal strength of the relevant cardinals. The analysis applies to general degree notions, Zermelo degree is merely the author’s choice for illustrating the idea.

I0(λ) is the assertion that there is an elementary embedding j : L(Vλ+1) → L(Vλ+1) with critical point < λ. We show that under I0(λ), the structure of Zermelo degrees at λ is very complicated: it has incomparable degrees, is not dense, satisfies Posner–Robinson theorem etc. In addition, we show that I0 together with a mild condition on the critical point of the embedding implies that the degree determinacy for Zermelo degrees at λ is false in L(Vλ+1). The key tool in this paper is a generic absoluteness theorem in the theory of I0, from which we obtain an analogue of Perfect Set Theorem for “projective” subsets of Vλ+1, and the Posner–Robinson follows as a corollary. Perfect Set Theorem and Posner–Robinson provide evidences supporting the analogy between $$AD$$ over L(ℝ) and I0 over L(Vλ+1), while the failure of degree determinacy is one for disanalogy. Furthermore, we conjecture that the failure of degree determinacy for Zermelo degrees at any uncountable cardinal is a theorem of $$ZFC$$ .

Copyright
References
Hide All
[1]Abraham, Uri, Proper forcing, Handbook of set theory. Springer, Dordrecht, 2010, pp. 333394.
[2]Becker, Howard, Inner model operators and the continuum hypothesis. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 96 (1986), no. 1, pp. 126129.
[3]Cramer, Scott Stefan, Inverse limit reflection and the structure of L(V λ+1), Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 2012.
[4]Devlin, Keith J., Constructibility, Perspectives in Mathematical Logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984.
[5]Dimonte, Vincenzo and Friedman, Sy-David, Rank-into-rank hypotheses and the failure of GCH, Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 53 (2014), no. 3-4, pp. 351366.
[6]Dodd, A. J. and Jensen, R. B., The covering lemma for L[U]. Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 22 (1982), no. 2, pp. 127135.
[7]Dodd, Tony and Jensen, Ronald, The covering lemma for K. Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 22 (1982), no. 1, pp. 130.
[8]Friedman, Sy D., Negative solutions to Post’s problem. I, Generalized recursion theory, II (Proceedings of Second Symposium, University of Oslo, Oslo, 1977), Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 94, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978, pp. 127133.
[9]Friedman, Sy D., Negative solutions to Post’s problem. II. Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 113 (1981), no. 1, pp. 2543.
[10]Gaifman, Haim, Elementary embeddings of models of set-theory and certain subtheories, Axiomatic set theory (Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, Vol. XIII, Part II, Univesity of California, Los Angeles, California, 1967), American Mathematical Society, Providence R.I., 1974, pp. 33101.
[11]Gitik, Moti, The negation of the singular cardinal hypothesis from o(κ) = κ ++. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 43 (1989), no. 3, pp. 209234.
[12]Gitik, Moti, Prikry-type forcings, Handbook of set theory. Springer, Dordrecht, 2010, pp. 13511447.
[13]Hamkins, Joel David, Small forcing makes any cardinal superdestructible, this Journal, vol. 63 (1998), no. 1, pp. 5158.
[14]Harrison, Joseph, Recursive pseudo-well-orderings. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 131 (1968), pp. 526543.
[15]Jech, Thomas, Set theory, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003.
[16]Jensen, Ronald B., Forcing with classes of conditions, Chapter 6 of Admissible Sets, URL: http://www.mathematik.hu-berlin.de/∼raesch/org/jensen/pdf/AS\_6.pdf.
[17]Kanamori, Akihiro, The higher infinite, Second edition, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003.
[18]Kechris, Alexander S., Kleinberg, Eugene M., Moschovakis, Yiannis N., and Woodin, W. Hugh, The axiom of determinacy, strong partition properties and nonsingular measures, Cabal Seminar 77–79 (Proc. Caltech-UCLA Logic Sem., 1977–79), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 839, Springer, Berlin, 1981, pp. 7599.
[19]Kleinberg, Eugene M., Infinitary combinatorics and the axiom of determinateness, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 612, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.
[20]Kunen, Kenneth, Elementary embeddings and infinitary combinatorics, this Journal, vol. 36 (1971), pp. 407413.
[21]Laver, Richard, Making the supercompactness of κ indestructible under κ-directed closed forcing. Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 29 (1978), no. 4, pp. 385388.
[22]Laver, Richard, The left distributive law and the freeness of an algebra of elementary embeddings. Advances in Mathematics, vol. 91 (1992), no. 2, pp. 209231.
[23]Laver, Richard, A division algorithm for the free left distributive algebra, Logic Colloquium ’90 (Helsinki, 1990), Lecture Notes Logic, vol. 2, Springer, Berlin, 1993, pp. 155162.
[24]Laver, Richard, On the algebra of elementary embeddings of a rank into itself. Advances in Mathematics, vol. 110 (1995), no. 2, pp. 334346.
[25]Laver, Richard, Braid group actions on left distributive structures, and well orderings in the braid groups. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, vol. 108 (1996), no. 1, pp. 8198.
[26]Laver, Richard, Implications between strong large cardinal axioms. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 90 (1997), no. 13, pp. 7990.
[27]Laver, Richard, Reflection of elementary embedding axioms on the L[V λ+1] hierarchy. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 107 (2001), no. 13, pp. 227238.
[28]Laver, Richard, On very large cardinals, Paul Erdős and his mathematics, II (Budapest, 1999), Bolyai Society Mathematical Studies, vol. 11, János Bolyai Mathematical Society, Budapest, 2002, pp. 453469.
[29]Mitchell, W. J., On the singular cardinal hypothesis. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 329 (1992), no. 2, pp. 507530.
[30]Mitchell, William J., The covering lemma, Handbook of set theory. Springer, Dordrecht, 2010, pp. 14971594.
[31]Neeman, Itay, Inner models in the region of a Woodin limit of Woodin cardinals. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 116 (2002), no. 13, pp. 67155.
[32]Posner, David B. and Robinson, Robert W., Degrees joining to , this Journal, vol. 46 (1981), no. 4, pp. 714722.
[33]Sacks, Gerald E., Higher recursion theory, Perspectives in Mathematical Logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990.
[34]Sacks, Gerald E. and Slaman, Theodore A., Generalized hyperarithmetic theory. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 60 (1990), no. 3, pp. 417443.
[35]Sami, Ramez L., Turing determinacy and the continuum hypothesis. Archive for Mathematical Logic, vol. 28 (1989), no. 3, pp. 149154.
[36]Sargsyan, Grigor, Descriptive inner model theory. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 19 (2013), no. 1, pp. 155.
[37]Schimmerling, Ernest, The ABC’s of mice. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 7 (2001), no. 4, pp. 485503.
[38]Shelah, Saharon, PCF without choice, ArXiv e-prints, (2010), [Sh:835]. arXiv:math/0510229.
[39]Shi, Xianghui and Trang, Nam Duc, I 0and combinatorics at λ+, preprint, 20 pages, 2014.
[40]Shore, Richard A. and Slaman, Theodore A., Defining the Turing jump. Mathematical Research Letter, vol. 6 (1999), no. 56, pp. 711722.
[41]Slaman, Theodore A. and Steel, John R., Definable functions on degrees, Cabal Seminar 81–85, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1333, Springer, Berlin, 1988, pp. 3755.
[42]Slaman, Theodore A., Complementation in the Turing degrees, this Journal, vol. 54 (1989), no. 1, pp. 160176.
[43]Solovay, Robert, Woodin’s proof on sharps, handwritten notes, 1981.
[44]Solovay, Robert M., Reinhardt, William N., and Kanamori, Akihiro, Strong axioms of infinity and elementary embeddings. Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 13 (1978), no. 1, pp. 73116.
[45]Steel, John R., HODL(R)is a core model below Θ. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 1 (1995), no. 1, pp. 7584.
[46]Woodin, W. Hugh, Some consistency results in ZFC using AD, Cabal seminar 79–81, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1019, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 172198.
[47]Woodin, W. Hugh, Notes on an AD-like axiom, July 6 1990. Seminar notes taken by George Kafkoulis.
[48]Woodin, W. Hugh, Suitable extender models I. Journal of Mathematical Logic, vol. 10 (2010), no. 12, pp. 101339.
[49]Woodin, W. Hugh, Suitable extender models II: beyond ω-huge. Journal of Mathematical Logic, vol. 11 (2011), no. 2, pp. 115436.
[50]Woodin, W. Hugh, The fine structure of suitable extender models I, 2014.
[51]Yang, Sen, Prikry-type forcing and minimal α-degree. ArXiv e-prints, (2013). arXiv:1310.0891.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Journal of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 0022-4812
  • EISSN: 1943-5886
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed