Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T16:12:52.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Embedding theorems for boolean algebras and consistency results on ordinal definable sets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Petr Štěpánek  and
Bohuslav Balcar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The existence of complete rigid Boolean algebras was first proved by McAloon [8] who also showed that every Boolean algebra can be completely embedded in a rigid complete Boolean algebra. McAloon was interested in consistency results on ordinal definable sets. His approach was based on forcing. Recently, Shelah [10] proved that for every uncountable cardinal κ there exists a Boolean algebra of power κ with rigid completion. Extending his method, we get the following theorems.

Theorem 1. Any Boolean algebra B can be completely embedded in a complete Boolean algebra C with no nontrivial σ-complete one-one endomor-phism. If B satisfies the κ-chain condition for an uncountable cardinal κ, the same holds true for C.

Since every automorphism is a complete endomorphism, it follows from Theorem 1 that C is rigid. The other extreme case of Boolean algebras are homogeneous algebras. It was proved by Kripke [7] that every Boolean algebra can be completely embedded in a homogeneous complete Boolean algebra. In his proof, the homogeneous algebra contains antichains of cardinality equal to the power of the embedded Boolean algebra. The following result shows that this is essential: the analogue of Theorem 1 is not provable in set theory even for Boolean algebras with a very weak homogeneity property. We use a Suslin tree with particular properties constructed by Jensen [6] in conjunction with a forcing argument.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , March 1977 , pp. 64 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1977

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]Cohen, P., The independence of the continuum hypothesis, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 50 (1963), pp. 1143–1148 and vol. 51 (1964), pp. 105–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[2]Erdös, P. and Rado, R., Intersection theorems for systems of sets, Journal of the London Mathematical Society, vol. 35 (1960), pp. 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Grigorieff, S., Intermediate submodels and generic extensions in set theory, Annals of Mathematics, vol. 101 (1975), pp. 447–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Jech, T., Lectures in set theory, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1971.Google Scholar
[5]Jech, T., Forcing with trees and original definability, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 7 (1974), pp. 387–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Jensen, R. and Johnsbraten, H., A new construction of a nonconstructible Δ31 subset of ω, Fundamente Mathematicae, vol. 81 (1974), pp. 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Kripke, S., An extension of a theorem of Gaifman-Hales-Solovay, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 61 (1967), pp. 29–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]McAloon, K., Consistency results about ordinal definability, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 2 (1971), pp. 449–467.Google Scholar
[9]McKenzie, R. and Monk, J., On automorphism groups of Boolean algebras, Preprint Institute of Mathematics ETH Zürich.Google Scholar
[10]Shelah, S., Why there are many nonisomorphic models for unsuperstable theories (mimeographed).Google Scholar
[11]Vopěnka, P. and Hájek, P., The theory of semisets, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1972.Google Scholar
[12]Engelkin, R. and Karlowicz, M., Some theorems of set theory and their topological consequences, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 57 (1965), pp. 275–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Juhász, I., Verbeek, A. and Kronenberg, N. S., Cardinal functions in topology, Mathematical Centre Tracts 34, Mathematisch Centrum Amsterdam, 1971.Google Scholar
[14]Sikorski, R., Boolean algebras, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1964.Google Scholar