Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Unbounded functions and infinite productivity of the Knaster property

Unbounded functions and infinite productivity of the Knaster property

Set Theory, Model Theory and Applications. Eilat, 2018.

18cc56b609c6a4b0968e856e3793cba4?s=128

Chris Lambie-Hanson

May 03, 2018
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Unbounded functions and infinite productivity of the Knaster property (Joint

    work with Assaf Rinot) Chris Lambie-Hanson Department of Mathematics Bar-Ilan University Set Theory, Model Theory and Applications Eilat, Israel 25 April 2018
  2. I. Productivity of chain conditions

  3. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well.
  4. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well. The question as to whether the κ-chain condition (for posets) is (or can consistently be) productive, where κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal, has led to a great deal of set theoretic research.
  5. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well. The question as to whether the κ-chain condition (for posets) is (or can consistently be) productive, where κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal, has led to a great deal of set theoretic research. • If MAℵ1 holds, then the ℵ1-chain condition is productive.
  6. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well. The question as to whether the κ-chain condition (for posets) is (or can consistently be) productive, where κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal, has led to a great deal of set theoretic research. • If MAℵ1 holds, then the ℵ1-chain condition is productive. • (Shelah) If κ > ℵ1 is a successor cardinal, then the κ-chain condition is not productive.
  7. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well. The question as to whether the κ-chain condition (for posets) is (or can consistently be) productive, where κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal, has led to a great deal of set theoretic research. • If MAℵ1 holds, then the ℵ1-chain condition is productive. • (Shelah) If κ > ℵ1 is a successor cardinal, then the κ-chain condition is not productive. • (Rinot) If κ > ℵ1 is a regular cardinal and the κ-chain condition is productive, then κ is weakly compact in L.
  8. The κ-chain condition Recall that a property is said to

    be productive if, whenever P and Q satisfy the property, then P × Q satisfies the property as well. The question as to whether the κ-chain condition (for posets) is (or can consistently be) productive, where κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal, has led to a great deal of set theoretic research. • If MAℵ1 holds, then the ℵ1-chain condition is productive. • (Shelah) If κ > ℵ1 is a successor cardinal, then the κ-chain condition is not productive. • (Rinot) If κ > ℵ1 is a regular cardinal and the κ-chain condition is productive, then κ is weakly compact in L. Conjecture (Todorcevic) For every regular cardinal κ > ℵ1, the κ-chain condition is productive iff κ is weakly compact.
  9. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ.
  10. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that,
  11. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ,
  12. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ, for every A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets,
  13. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ, for every A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ,
  14. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ, for every A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ, there are a, b ∈ A such that a < b and c[a × b] = {i}.
  15. Pr1 (κ, κ, θ, χ) Throughout the talk, κ will

    be a regular uncountable cardinal, and θ, χ, and µ will be cardinals less than or equal to κ. Definition (Shelah) Pr1(κ, κ, θ, χ) asserts the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ, for every A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ, there are a, b ∈ A such that a < b and c[a × b] = {i}. Lemma If χ < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (< χ)-inaccessible, and Pr1(κ, κ, 2, χ) holds, then there is a χ-directed closed, κ-c.c. poset P such that P2 is not κ-c.c.
  16. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if,
  17. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ,
  18. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions.
  19. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions. The κ-Knaster property is clearly a strengthening of the κ-chain condition.
  20. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions. The κ-Knaster property is clearly a strengthening of the κ-chain condition. Moreover, the κ-Knaster property is always productive.
  21. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions. The κ-Knaster property is clearly a strengthening of the κ-chain condition. Moreover, the κ-Knaster property is always productive. But can we ask for more?
  22. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions. The κ-Knaster property is clearly a strengthening of the κ-chain condition. Moreover, the κ-Knaster property is always productive. But can we ask for more? Say that a property is θ-productive if, whenever {Pi | i < θ} all have the property, then i<θ Pi has the property as well. (All products here are full-support.)
  23. The κ-Knaster property Definition A poset P has the κ-Knaster

    property if, for every A ⊆ P of size κ, there is B ⊆ A of size κ consisting of pairwise ≤P -compatible conditions. The κ-Knaster property is clearly a strengthening of the κ-chain condition. Moreover, the κ-Knaster property is always productive. But can we ask for more? Say that a property is θ-productive if, whenever {Pi | i < θ} all have the property, then i<θ Pi has the property as well. (All products here are full-support.) Question Under what circumstances can the κ-Knaster property be θ-productive, where θ < κ is an infinite, regular cardinal?
  24. Infinite productivity Some known facts:

  25. Infinite productivity Some known facts: • If κ is weakly

    compact, then all κ-c.c. posets are in fact κ-Knaster, and both properties are θ-productive for all θ < κ.
  26. Infinite productivity Some known facts: • If κ is weakly

    compact, then all κ-c.c. posets are in fact κ-Knaster, and both properties are θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (Cox-L¨ ucke) Assuming the consistency of a weakly compact cardinal, it is consistent that there is an inaccessible cardinal κ that is not weakly compact and such that the κ-Knaster property is θ-productive for all θ < κ.
  27. Infinite productivity Some known facts: • If κ is weakly

    compact, then all κ-c.c. posets are in fact κ-Knaster, and both properties are θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (Cox-L¨ ucke) Assuming the consistency of a weakly compact cardinal, it is consistent that there is an inaccessible cardinal κ that is not weakly compact and such that the κ-Knaster property is θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (LH-L¨ ucke) If the κ-Knaster property is ℵ0-productive, then κ is weakly compact in L.
  28. Infinite productivity Some known facts: • If κ is weakly

    compact, then all κ-c.c. posets are in fact κ-Knaster, and both properties are θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (Cox-L¨ ucke) Assuming the consistency of a weakly compact cardinal, it is consistent that there is an inaccessible cardinal κ that is not weakly compact and such that the κ-Knaster property is θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (LH-L¨ ucke) If the κ-Knaster property is ℵ0-productive, then κ is weakly compact in L. These leave open some specific questions, including the following, which we will answer today.
  29. Infinite productivity Some known facts: • If κ is weakly

    compact, then all κ-c.c. posets are in fact κ-Knaster, and both properties are θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (Cox-L¨ ucke) Assuming the consistency of a weakly compact cardinal, it is consistent that there is an inaccessible cardinal κ that is not weakly compact and such that the κ-Knaster property is θ-productive for all θ < κ. • (LH-L¨ ucke) If the κ-Knaster property is ℵ0-productive, then κ is weakly compact in L. These leave open some specific questions, including the following, which we will answer today. Question Is there consistently a successor cardinal κ such that the κ-Knaster property is ℵ0-productive?
  30. U(κ, µ, θ, χ)

  31. U(κ, µ, θ, χ) Definition U(κ, µ, θ, χ) asserts

    the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that,
  32. U(κ, µ, θ, χ) Definition U(κ, µ, θ, χ) asserts

    the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ and A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets,
  33. U(κ, µ, θ, χ) Definition U(κ, µ, θ, χ) asserts

    the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ and A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ,
  34. U(κ, µ, θ, χ) Definition U(κ, µ, θ, χ) asserts

    the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ and A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ, there is B ⊆ A of size µ such that, for all a < b, both from B, we have min(c[a × b]) > i.
  35. U(κ, µ, θ, χ) Definition U(κ, µ, θ, χ) asserts

    the existence of a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for every χ < χ and A ⊆ [κ]χ consisting of κ-many pairwise disjoint sets, and for every color i < θ, there is B ⊆ A of size µ such that, for all a < b, both from B, we have min(c[a × b]) > i. Note that, for all µ ≤ µ and χ ≤ χ, U(κ, µ, θ, χ) implies U(κ, µ , θ, χ ), but there is no such monotonicity in the third coordinate.
  36. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that
  37. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds;
  38. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ;
  39. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ; • Pθ is not κ-c.c.
  40. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ; • Pθ is not κ-c.c. Sketch of proof. Let c : [κ]2 → θ witness U(κ, κ, θ, χ).
  41. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ; • Pθ is not κ-c.c. Sketch of proof. Let c : [κ]2 → θ witness U(κ, κ, θ, χ). For all i < θ, let Pi be the poset whose conditions are all sets x ∈ [κ]<χ such that min(c“[x]2) > i, ordered by reverse inclusion.
  42. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ; • Pθ is not κ-c.c. Sketch of proof. Let c : [κ]2 → θ witness U(κ, κ, θ, χ). For all i < θ, let Pi be the poset whose conditions are all sets x ∈ [κ]<χ such that min(c“[x]2) > i, ordered by reverse inclusion. Let P be the lottery sum i<θ Pi .
  43. Failure of infinite productivity Lemma Suppose that θ ≤ χ

    < κ are infinite, regular cardinals, κ is (<χ)-inaccessible, and U(κ, κ, θ, χ) holds. Then there is a poset P such that • P is well-met and χ-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; • Pτ is κ-Knaster (in fact, has precaliber κ) for all τ < θ; • Pθ is not κ-c.c. Sketch of proof. Let c : [κ]2 → θ witness U(κ, κ, θ, χ). For all i < θ, let Pi be the poset whose conditions are all sets x ∈ [κ]<χ such that min(c“[x]2) > i, ordered by reverse inclusion. Let P be the lottery sum i<θ Pi . Now check that P works.
  44. Productivity at successor cardinals

  45. Productivity at successor cardinals The principle U(· · · )

    has been implicit in a variety of previous work. Particularly notable for us is the following result of Todorcevic.
  46. Productivity at successor cardinals The principle U(· · · )

    has been implicit in a variety of previous work. Particularly notable for us is the following result of Todorcevic. Theorem (Todorcevic) For every infinite cardinal λ, U(λ+, λ+, ℵ0, cf(λ)) holds.
  47. Productivity at successor cardinals The principle U(· · · )

    has been implicit in a variety of previous work. Particularly notable for us is the following result of Todorcevic. Theorem (Todorcevic) For every infinite cardinal λ, U(λ+, λ+, ℵ0, cf(λ)) holds. Corollary For every successor cardinal κ, the κ-Knaster property fails to be ℵ0-productive.
  48. II. Closed colorings

  49. Closed colorings We are particularly interested in witnesses to U(·

    · · ) that have certain closure properties. These closed functions are better-behaved than arbitrary witnesses to U(· · · ) and also arise naturally in practice.
  50. Closed colorings We are particularly interested in witnesses to U(·

    · · ) that have certain closure properties. These closed functions are better-behaved than arbitrary witnesses to U(· · · ) and also arise naturally in practice. Definition Suppose that c : [κ]2 → θ is a coloring.
  51. Closed colorings We are particularly interested in witnesses to U(·

    · · ) that have certain closure properties. These closed functions are better-behaved than arbitrary witnesses to U(· · · ) and also arise naturally in practice. Definition Suppose that c : [κ]2 → θ is a coloring. 1 For all β < κ and all i < θ, let Dc ≤i (β) := {α < β | c(α, β) ≤ i}.
  52. Closed colorings We are particularly interested in witnesses to U(·

    · · ) that have certain closure properties. These closed functions are better-behaved than arbitrary witnesses to U(· · · ) and also arise naturally in practice. Definition Suppose that c : [κ]2 → θ is a coloring. 1 For all β < κ and all i < θ, let Dc ≤i (β) := {α < β | c(α, β) ≤ i}. 2 We say that c is closed if Dc ≤i (β) is closed as a subset of β for all β < κ and all i < θ.
  53. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that
  54. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that • Cα is a club in α for all α ∈ acc(κ);
  55. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that • Cα is a club in α for all α ∈ acc(κ); • Cα+1 = {α} for all α < κ.
  56. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that • Cα is a club in α for all α ∈ acc(κ); • Cα+1 = {α} for all α < κ. Given a C-sequence C over κ, we will perform walks along C.
  57. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that • Cα is a club in α for all α ∈ acc(κ); • Cα+1 = {α} for all α < κ. Given a C-sequence C over κ, we will perform walks along C. We define the upper trace function tr : [κ]2 → [κ]<ω recursively by tr(α, β) = {β} ∪ tr(α, min(Cβ \ α)), subject to the boundary condition tr(α, α) = ∅.
  58. Walking along C-sequences Definition A C-sequence over κ is a

    sequence Cα | α < κ such that • Cα is a club in α for all α ∈ acc(κ); • Cα+1 = {α} for all α < κ. Given a C-sequence C over κ, we will perform walks along C. We define the upper trace function tr : [κ]2 → [κ]<ω recursively by tr(α, β) = {β} ∪ tr(α, min(Cβ \ α)), subject to the boundary condition tr(α, α) = ∅. Our primary strategy for defining closed witnesses to U(κ, µ, θ, χ) is to isolate an appropriate function h : κ → θ and define a coloring c : [κ]2 → θ by letting c(α, β) = max(h[tr(α, β)]).
  59. A first construction Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are

    regular cardinals and there are a sequence Hi | i < θ of pairwise disjoint stationary subsets of κ and a C-sequence C = Cα | α < κ such that, for all α < κ and all sufficiently large i < θ, acc(Cα) ∩ Hi = ∅.
  60. A first construction Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are

    regular cardinals and there are a sequence Hi | i < θ of pairwise disjoint stationary subsets of κ and a C-sequence C = Cα | α < κ such that, for all α < κ and all sufficiently large i < θ, acc(Cα) ∩ Hi = ∅. Then there is a closed coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for all regular χ < κ, if Hi ∩ cof(≥ χ) is stationary for unboundedly many i < θ, then c witnesses U(κ, κ, θ, χ).
  61. A first construction Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are

    regular cardinals and there are a sequence Hi | i < θ of pairwise disjoint stationary subsets of κ and a C-sequence C = Cα | α < κ such that, for all α < κ and all sufficiently large i < θ, acc(Cα) ∩ Hi = ∅. Then there is a closed coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for all regular χ < κ, if Hi ∩ cof(≥ χ) is stationary for unboundedly many i < θ, then c witnesses U(κ, κ, θ, χ). Sketch of proof. Walk along C, and define h : κ → θ and c : [κ]2 → θ by letting
  62. A first construction Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are

    regular cardinals and there are a sequence Hi | i < θ of pairwise disjoint stationary subsets of κ and a C-sequence C = Cα | α < κ such that, for all α < κ and all sufficiently large i < θ, acc(Cα) ∩ Hi = ∅. Then there is a closed coloring c : [κ]2 → θ such that, for all regular χ < κ, if Hi ∩ cof(≥ χ) is stationary for unboundedly many i < θ, then c witnesses U(κ, κ, θ, χ). Sketch of proof. Walk along C, and define h : κ → θ and c : [κ]2 → θ by letting h(η) = sup{i < θ | η ∈ Hi or acc(Cη) ∩ Hi = ∅}; c(α, β) = max(h[tr(α, β)]).
  63. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ).
  64. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ).
  65. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular.
  66. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular. 3 κ = λ+ and cf(λ) = θ.
  67. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular. 3 κ = λ+ and cf(λ) = θ. 4 (κ) holds.
  68. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular. 3 κ = λ+ and cf(λ) = θ. 4 (κ) holds. Sketch of Proof of (3). Let λi | i < θ be an increasing sequence of regular cardinals converging to λ.
  69. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular. 3 κ = λ+ and cf(λ) = θ. 4 (κ) holds. Sketch of Proof of (3). Let λi | i < θ be an increasing sequence of regular cardinals converging to λ. Let Hi = κ ∩ cof(λi ).
  70. Corollaries Corollary Suppose that θ, χ < κ are regular

    cardinals. Any one of the following entails the existence of a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ). 1 There is a non-reflecting stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(≥ χ). 2 κ = λ+ and λ is regular. 3 κ = λ+ and cf(λ) = θ. 4 (κ) holds. Sketch of Proof of (3). Let λi | i < θ be an increasing sequence of regular cardinals converging to λ. Let Hi = κ ∩ cof(λi ). Let Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that otp(Cα) = cf(α) for all α ∈ acc(κ).
  71. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either
  72. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or
  73. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously.
  74. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously. Then there is a closed witness to U(λ+, λ+, θ, cf(λ)).
  75. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously. Then there is a closed witness to U(λ+, λ+, θ, cf(λ)). Theorem Suppose that κ is an inaccessible cardinal, θ, χ < κ are regular cardinals, and there is a stationary S ⊆ κ such that either
  76. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously. Then there is a closed witness to U(λ+, λ+, θ, cf(λ)). Theorem Suppose that κ is an inaccessible cardinal, θ, χ < κ are regular cardinals, and there is a stationary S ⊆ κ such that either 1 S ⊆ cof(χ) and ♣(S) holds; or
  77. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously. Then there is a closed witness to U(λ+, λ+, θ, cf(λ)). Theorem Suppose that κ is an inaccessible cardinal, θ, χ < κ are regular cardinals, and there is a stationary S ⊆ κ such that either 1 S ⊆ cof(χ) and ♣(S) holds; or 2 S ⊆ cof(≥ χ) and reflects at no inaccessible cardinal.
  78. Further results Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular cardinal,

    θ < λ is a regular cardinal, and either 1 2λ = λ+; or 2 there is a collection of fewer than cf(λ)-many stationary subsets of λ+ that do not reflect simultaneously. Then there is a closed witness to U(λ+, λ+, θ, cf(λ)). Theorem Suppose that κ is an inaccessible cardinal, θ, χ < κ are regular cardinals, and there is a stationary S ⊆ κ such that either 1 S ⊆ cof(χ) and ♣(S) holds; or 2 S ⊆ cof(≥ χ) and reflects at no inaccessible cardinal. Then there is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ).
  79. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ.
  80. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ. We conjecture that this in fact characterizes weak compactness among regular, uncountable cardinals.
  81. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ. We conjecture that this in fact characterizes weak compactness among regular, uncountable cardinals. Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals. Then U(λ+, 2, θ, cf(λ)+) fails for every regular θ ∈ λ \ {cf(λ)}.
  82. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ. We conjecture that this in fact characterizes weak compactness among regular, uncountable cardinals. Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals. Then U(λ+, 2, θ, cf(λ)+) fails for every regular θ ∈ λ \ {cf(λ)}. Question Can there consistently be a nontrivial failure of U(· · · ) at ℵω+1?
  83. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ. We conjecture that this in fact characterizes weak compactness among regular, uncountable cardinals. Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals. Then U(λ+, 2, θ, cf(λ)+) fails for every regular θ ∈ λ \ {cf(λ)}. Question Can there consistently be a nontrivial failure of U(· · · ) at ℵω+1? For example, U(ℵω+1, 2, ℵ1, ℵ1)?
  84. Negative results Proposition Suppose that κ is a weakly compact

    cardinal. Then U(κ, 2, θ, 2) fails for every θ < κ. We conjecture that this in fact characterizes weak compactness among regular, uncountable cardinals. Theorem Suppose that λ is a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals. Then U(λ+, 2, θ, cf(λ)+) fails for every regular θ ∈ λ \ {cf(λ)}. Question Can there consistently be a nontrivial failure of U(· · · ) at ℵω+1? For example, U(ℵω+1, 2, ℵ1, ℵ1)? Or U(ℵω+1, ℵω+1, ℵ1, ℵ1)?
  85. III. The C-sequence number

  86. The C-sequence number Theorem (Todorcevic) For every regular, uncountable cardinal

    κ, the following are equivalent.
  87. The C-sequence number Theorem (Todorcevic) For every regular, uncountable cardinal

    κ, the following are equivalent. 1 κ is weakly compact.
  88. The C-sequence number Theorem (Todorcevic) For every regular, uncountable cardinal

    κ, the following are equivalent. 1 κ is weakly compact. 2 For every C-sequence Cα | α < κ , there is an unbounded D ⊆ κ such that, for every α < κ, there is β < κ for which D ∩ α = Cβ ∩ α.
  89. The C-sequence number Theorem (Todorcevic) For every regular, uncountable cardinal

    κ, the following are equivalent. 1 κ is weakly compact. 2 For every C-sequence Cα | α < κ , there is an unbounded D ⊆ κ such that, for every α < κ, there is β < κ for which D ∩ α = Cβ ∩ α. Definition (The C-sequence number) For every regular, uncountable cardinal κ, let χ(κ) = 0 if κ is weakly compact.
  90. The C-sequence number Theorem (Todorcevic) For every regular, uncountable cardinal

    κ, the following are equivalent. 1 κ is weakly compact. 2 For every C-sequence Cα | α < κ , there is an unbounded D ⊆ κ such that, for every α < κ, there is β < κ for which D ∩ α = Cβ ∩ α. Definition (The C-sequence number) For every regular, uncountable cardinal κ, let χ(κ) = 0 if κ is weakly compact. Otherwise, let χ(κ) be the least cardinal χ such that, for every C-sequence Cα | α < κ , there is an unbounded D ⊆ κ such that, for every α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ for which D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ.
  91. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ.
  92. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ.
  93. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ.
  94. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ).
  95. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ). 4 If χ(κ) > 1, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0.
  96. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ). 4 If χ(κ) > 1, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 5 Every stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) reflects.
  97. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ). 4 If χ(κ) > 1, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 5 Every stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. 6 If µ < κ and (κ, < µ) holds, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0.
  98. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ). 4 If χ(κ) > 1, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 5 Every stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. 6 If µ < κ and (κ, < µ) holds, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 7 If (κ, < ω) holds, then χ(κ) is as large as possible.
  99. Some basic facts Proposition The C-sequence number satisfies the following

    properties. 1 χ(κ) ≤ κ. 2 For every infinite cardinal λ, cf(λ) ≤ χ(λ+) ≤ λ. In particular, if λ is regular, then χ(λ+) = λ. 3 If λ is a singular limit of supercompact cardinals, then χ(λ+) = cf(λ). 4 If χ(κ) > 1, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 5 Every stationary subset of κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. 6 If µ < κ and (κ, < µ) holds, then χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0. 7 If (κ, < ω) holds, then χ(κ) is as large as possible. I.e., χ(κ) = sup(κ ∩ Reg).
  100. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect.
  101. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ.
  102. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ. Let D ⊆ κ witness the value of χ(κ) for C, i.e., for all α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ(κ) such that D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ.
  103. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ. Let D ⊆ κ witness the value of χ(κ) for C, i.e., for all α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ(κ) such that D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ. Then we can find a limit point δ of D such that
  104. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ. Let D ⊆ κ witness the value of χ(κ) for C, i.e., for all α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ(κ) such that D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ. Then we can find a limit point δ of D such that • δ ∈ S;
  105. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ. Let D ⊆ κ witness the value of χ(κ) for C, i.e., for all α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ(κ) such that D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ. Then we can find a limit point δ of D such that • δ ∈ S; • there is β ∈ κ \ (δ + 1) such that δ is a limit point of Cβ.
  106. Some basic facts Proposition Every stationary subset of κ ∩

    cof(> χ(κ)) reflects. Sketch of the Proof. Suppose that S ⊆ κ ∩ cof(> χ(κ)) is stationary and S does not reflect. Let C = Cα | α < κ be a C-sequence such that acc(Cα) ∩ S = ∅ for all α < κ. Let D ⊆ κ witness the value of χ(κ) for C, i.e., for all α < κ, there is b ∈ [κ]χ(κ) such that D ∩ α ⊆ β∈b Cβ. Then we can find a limit point δ of D such that • δ ∈ S; • there is β ∈ κ \ (δ + 1) such that δ is a limit point of Cβ. But then δ ∈ acc(Cβ) ∩ S, which is a contradiction.
  107. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ,
  108. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ, and suppose that there is a closed witness to U(κ, 2, θ, χ).
  109. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ, and suppose that there is a closed witness to U(κ, 2, θ, χ). Then χ(κ) ≥ χ.
  110. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ, and suppose that there is a closed witness to U(κ, 2, θ, χ). Then χ(κ) ≥ χ. Theorem There is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, ω, χ(κ)).
  111. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ, and suppose that there is a closed witness to U(κ, 2, θ, χ). Then χ(κ) ≥ χ. Theorem There is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, ω, χ(κ)). Theorem If χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0, there is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, χ(κ), χ(κ)).
  112. χ(κ) and closed colorings Lemma Suppose that ℵ0 ≤ χ

    ≤ θ = cf(θ) < κ, and suppose that there is a closed witness to U(κ, 2, θ, χ). Then χ(κ) ≥ χ. Theorem There is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, ω, χ(κ)). Theorem If χ(κ) ≥ ℵ0, there is a closed witness to U(κ, κ, χ(κ), χ(κ)). As far as we know, it could be a ZFC theorem that, for all infinite, regular θ < κ, there is a (closed) witness to U(κ, κ, θ, χ(κ)).
  113. IV. Subadditive colorings

  114. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ,
  115. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ, 1 c(α, γ) ≤ max{c(α, β), c(β, γ)};
  116. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ, 1 c(α, γ) ≤ max{c(α, β), c(β, γ)}; 2 c(α, β) ≤ max{c(α, γ), c(β, γ)}.
  117. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ, 1 c(α, γ) ≤ max{c(α, β), c(β, γ)}; 2 c(α, β) ≤ max{c(α, γ), c(β, γ)}. Closed, subadditive witnesses to U(· · · ) behave particularly nicely.
  118. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ, 1 c(α, γ) ≤ max{c(α, β), c(β, γ)}; 2 c(α, β) ≤ max{c(α, γ), c(β, γ)}. Closed, subadditive witnesses to U(· · · ) behave particularly nicely. Lemma Suppose that θ < κ is regular and c : [κ]2 → θ is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2).
  119. Subadditivity Definition We say that a coloring c : [κ]2

    → θ is subadditive if, for all α < β < γ < κ, 1 c(α, γ) ≤ max{c(α, β), c(β, γ)}; 2 c(α, β) ≤ max{c(α, γ), c(β, γ)}. Closed, subadditive witnesses to U(· · · ) behave particularly nicely. Lemma Suppose that θ < κ is regular and c : [κ]2 → θ is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2). Then c is in fact a witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)).
  120. Subadditivity and squares Theorem If (κ) holds, then, for every

    regular θ < κ, there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)).
  121. Subadditivity and squares Theorem If (κ) holds, then, for every

    regular θ < κ, there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)). In fact, by a result of LH and L¨ ucke, (κ) implies ind(κ, θ), and our result states that ind(κ, θ) implies the existence of a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)).
  122. Subadditivity and squares Theorem If (κ) holds, then, for every

    regular θ < κ, there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)). In fact, by a result of LH and L¨ ucke, (κ) implies ind(κ, θ), and our result states that ind(κ, θ) implies the existence of a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, κ, θ, sup(κ ∩ Reg)). By results obtained independently by Shani and LH, (κ, 2) (or even λ,2, if κ = λ+) does not suffice to obtain the conclusion of the Theorem.
  123. Sequential fans Given infinite cardinals θ ≤ κ, the sequential

    fan Fκ,θ is a topological space with underlying set (κ × θ) ∪ {∗}. Each point in κ × θ is isolated, and a basic open set of ∗ is a set of the form Uf := {(α, i) | α < κ, i ≥ f (α)} ∪ {∗}, where f : κ → θ.
  124. Sequential fans Given infinite cardinals θ ≤ κ, the sequential

    fan Fκ,θ is a topological space with underlying set (κ × θ) ∪ {∗}. Each point in κ × θ is isolated, and a basic open set of ∗ is a set of the form Uf := {(α, i) | α < κ, i ≥ f (α)} ∪ {∗}, where f : κ → θ. There are interesting questions regarding the tightness of the square of the sequential fan, particularly at ℵ2, that are connected to questions about compactness for collectionwise Hausdorffness in first countable spaces.
  125. Sequential fans Given infinite cardinals θ ≤ κ, the sequential

    fan Fκ,θ is a topological space with underlying set (κ × θ) ∪ {∗}. Each point in κ × θ is isolated, and a basic open set of ∗ is a set of the form Uf := {(α, i) | α < κ, i ≥ f (α)} ∪ {∗}, where f : κ → θ. There are interesting questions regarding the tightness of the square of the sequential fan, particularly at ℵ2, that are connected to questions about compactness for collectionwise Hausdorffness in first countable spaces. The following observation is essentially due to Todorcevic.
  126. Sequential fans Given infinite cardinals θ ≤ κ, the sequential

    fan Fκ,θ is a topological space with underlying set (κ × θ) ∪ {∗}. Each point in κ × θ is isolated, and a basic open set of ∗ is a set of the form Uf := {(α, i) | α < κ, i ≥ f (α)} ∪ {∗}, where f : κ → θ. There are interesting questions regarding the tightness of the square of the sequential fan, particularly at ℵ2, that are connected to questions about compactness for collectionwise Hausdorffness in first countable spaces. The following observation is essentially due to Todorcevic. Fact If there is a subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2), then t(F2 κ,θ ) = κ.
  127. Sequential fans Given infinite cardinals θ ≤ κ, the sequential

    fan Fκ,θ is a topological space with underlying set (κ × θ) ∪ {∗}. Each point in κ × θ is isolated, and a basic open set of ∗ is a set of the form Uf := {(α, i) | α < κ, i ≥ f (α)} ∪ {∗}, where f : κ → θ. There are interesting questions regarding the tightness of the square of the sequential fan, particularly at ℵ2, that are connected to questions about compactness for collectionwise Hausdorffness in first countable spaces. The following observation is essentially due to Todorcevic. Fact If there is a subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2), then t(F2 κ,θ ) = κ. The consistency of t(F2 ℵ2,ℵ0 ) < ℵ2 is a major open question.
  128. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P).
  129. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P). If P is κ-stationarily layered, then P has precaliber κ.
  130. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P). If P is κ-stationarily layered, then P has precaliber κ. Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are regular, κ is θ-inaccessible, and there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2). Then there are posets {Pi | i < θ} such that
  131. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P). If P is κ-stationarily layered, then P has precaliber κ. Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are regular, κ is θ-inaccessible, and there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2). Then there are posets {Pi | i < θ} such that 1 each Pi is well-met and θ+-directed closed with greatest lower bounds;
  132. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P). If P is κ-stationarily layered, then P has precaliber κ. Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are regular, κ is θ-inaccessible, and there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2). Then there are posets {Pi | i < θ} such that 1 each Pi is well-met and θ+-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; 2 for all j < θ, i<j Pi is κ-stationarily layered;
  133. Stationarily layered posets Definition (Cox) A poset P is κ-stationarily

    layered if the collection of regular suborders of P of size less than κ is stationary in Pκ(P). If P is κ-stationarily layered, then P has precaliber κ. Theorem Suppose that θ < κ are regular, κ is θ-inaccessible, and there is a closed, subadditive witness to U(κ, 2, θ, 2). Then there are posets {Pi | i < θ} such that 1 each Pi is well-met and θ+-directed closed with greatest lower bounds; 2 for all j < θ, i<j Pi is κ-stationarily layered; 3 i<θ Pi is not κ-c.c.
  134. References The work in this talk comes from the following

    two papers, both jointly written with Assaf Rinot:
  135. References The work in this talk comes from the following

    two papers, both jointly written with Assaf Rinot: • Knaster and friends I: Closed colorings and precalibers. Preprint available at math.biu.ac.il/∼lambiec/knaster1.pdf
  136. References The work in this talk comes from the following

    two papers, both jointly written with Assaf Rinot: • Knaster and friends I: Closed colorings and precalibers. Preprint available at math.biu.ac.il/∼lambiec/knaster1.pdf • Knaster and friends II: Subadditive colorings and the C-sequence number. Coming soon!
  137. References The work in this talk comes from the following

    two papers, both jointly written with Assaf Rinot: • Knaster and friends I: Closed colorings and precalibers. Preprint available at math.biu.ac.il/∼lambiec/knaster1.pdf • Knaster and friends II: Subadditive colorings and the C-sequence number. Coming soon! All feedback is welcome!
  138. References The work in this talk comes from the following

    two papers, both jointly written with Assaf Rinot: • Knaster and friends I: Closed colorings and precalibers. Preprint available at math.biu.ac.il/∼lambiec/knaster1.pdf • Knaster and friends II: Subadditive colorings and the C-sequence number. Coming soon! All feedback is welcome! All artwork by Clifford Styll
  139. Thank you!