Slide 1

Slide 1 text

Robust reflection principles Chris Lambie-Hanson Einstein Institute of Mathematics Hebrew University of Jerusalem 2016 ASL Winter Meeting Seattle, WA 9 January 2016

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

Reflection/compactness principles The study of reflection and compactness principles has been a central theme in modern set theory.

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

Reflection/compactness principles The study of reflection and compactness principles has been a central theme in modern set theory. Very roughly speaking, a reflection principle at a cardinal κ takes the following form: If (something) holds for κ, then it holds for some (many) α < κ.

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

Reflection/compactness principles The study of reflection and compactness principles has been a central theme in modern set theory. Very roughly speaking, a reflection principle at a cardinal κ takes the following form: If (something) holds for κ, then it holds for some (many) α < κ. Compactness is the dual notion: If (something) holds for all (most) α < κ, then it holds for κ.

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

Reflection/compactness principles The study of reflection and compactness principles has been a central theme in modern set theory. Very roughly speaking, a reflection principle at a cardinal κ takes the following form: If (something) holds for κ, then it holds for some (many) α < κ. Compactness is the dual notion: If (something) holds for all (most) α < κ, then it holds for κ. Canonical inner models, such as L, typically exhibit large degrees of incompactness, while large cardinals tend to imply compactness and reflection principles.

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅.

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β.

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β. 3 Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Refl(κ) is the assertion that every stationary subset of κ reflects.

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β. 3 Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Refl(κ) is the assertion that every stationary subset of κ reflects. • If κ is weakly compact, then Refl(κ) holds.

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β. 3 Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Refl(κ) is the assertion that every stationary subset of κ reflects. • If κ is weakly compact, then Refl(κ) holds. • If κ is the successor of a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals, then Refl(κ) holds.

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β. 3 Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Refl(κ) is the assertion that every stationary subset of κ reflects. • If κ is weakly compact, then Refl(κ) holds. • If κ is the successor of a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals, then Refl(κ) holds. • (Jensen) If V = L, then Refl(κ) holds iff κ is weakly compact.

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

Stationary reflection Definition Let α be an ordinal with cf(α) > ω. 1 S ⊆ α is stationary in α if, for every closed, unbounded C ⊆ α, C ∩ S = ∅. 2 Suppose S ⊆ α is stationary, β < α, and cf(β) > ω. Then S reflects at β if S ∩ β is stationary in β. 3 Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Refl(κ) is the assertion that every stationary subset of κ reflects. • If κ is weakly compact, then Refl(κ) holds. • If κ is the successor of a singular limit of strongly compact cardinals, then Refl(κ) holds. • (Jensen) If V = L, then Refl(κ) holds iff κ is weakly compact. • (Magidor) Con(ZFC+ there are infinitely many supercompact cardinals) ⇒ Con(ZFC + Refl(ℵω+1)).

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

The tree property Definition A partial order (T,

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal.

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

The tree property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. 1 A tree (T,

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

Robustness Definition Suppose κ is a cardinal and P is a property that a cardinal can satisfy (e.g. being weakly compact, having the tree property, etc.). κ satisfies P robustly (or κ has the robust property P) if, whenever Q is a forcing poset and |Q|+ < κ, κ satisfies P in V Q.

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

Robustness Definition Suppose κ is a cardinal and P is a property that a cardinal can satisfy (e.g. being weakly compact, having the tree property, etc.). κ satisfies P robustly (or κ has the robust property P) if, whenever Q is a forcing poset and |Q|+ < κ, κ satisfies P in V Q. Theorem (Levy-Solovay) Most large cardinal properties (e.g. being inaccessible, Mahlo, weakly compact, measurable, strongly compact, supercompact, etc.) are robust.

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

Robustness Definition Suppose κ is a cardinal and P is a property that a cardinal can satisfy (e.g. being weakly compact, having the tree property, etc.). κ satisfies P robustly (or κ has the robust property P) if, whenever Q is a forcing poset and |Q|+ < κ, κ satisfies P in V Q. Theorem (Levy-Solovay) Most large cardinal properties (e.g. being inaccessible, Mahlo, weakly compact, measurable, strongly compact, supercompact, etc.) are robust. Thus, reflection principles, when they hold due to the existence of large cardinals, are themselves robust.

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

Robustness Definition Suppose κ is a cardinal and P is a property that a cardinal can satisfy (e.g. being weakly compact, having the tree property, etc.). κ satisfies P robustly (or κ has the robust property P) if, whenever Q is a forcing poset and |Q|+ < κ, κ satisfies P in V Q. Theorem (Levy-Solovay) Most large cardinal properties (e.g. being inaccessible, Mahlo, weakly compact, measurable, strongly compact, supercompact, etc.) are robust. Thus, reflection principles, when they hold due to the existence of large cardinals, are themselves robust. This raises the question: to what extent can reflection principles hold robustly or hold non-robustly at small cardinals?

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

Robust stationary reflection Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal, and let S ⊆ κ be stationary. S reflects at arbitrarily large cofinalities if, for every regular cardinal λ < κ, there is α < κ such that cf(α) ≥ λ and S reflects at α.

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

Robust stationary reflection Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal, and let S ⊆ κ be stationary. S reflects at arbitrarily large cofinalities if, for every regular cardinal λ < κ, there is α < κ such that cf(α) ≥ λ and S reflects at α. Question (Eisworth) Suppose µ is a singular cardinal, κ = µ+, and Refl(κ) holds. Must it be the case that every stationary subset of κ reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities?

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

Robust stationary reflection Proposition If Refl(ℵω+1) holds, then every stationary subset of ℵω+1 reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities.

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

Robust stationary reflection Proposition If Refl(ℵω+1) holds, then every stationary subset of ℵω+1 reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities. Theorem (Cummings-LH) Con(ZFC+ there is an ω · 2-sequence of supercompact cardinals) ⇒ Con(ZFC + Refl(ℵω·2+1) + there is a stationary subset of ℵω·2+1 that does not reflect at any ordinal of cofinality > ℵω).

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

Robust stationary reflection Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Then the following are equivalent.

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

Robust stationary reflection Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Then the following are equivalent. 1 Every stationary subset of κ reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities.

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

Robust stationary reflection Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Then the following are equivalent. 1 Every stationary subset of κ reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities. 2 Refl(κ) holds robustly.

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

Robust stationary reflection Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. Then the following are equivalent. 1 Every stationary subset of κ reflects at arbitrarily high cofinalities. 2 Refl(κ) holds robustly. Theorem (LH) It is consistent, relative to large cardinals, that Refl(κ) holds non-robustly, where κ is the least inaccessible cardinal.

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

Strong systems Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. S = Sα | α < κ , R is a strong κ-system if: 1 For all α < κ, 0 < |Sα| < κ and, if α = β < κ, then Sα ∩ Sβ = ∅. 2 R (sometimes denoted RS) is a set of binary, transitive, tree-like relations on α<κ Sα. 3 For all R ∈ R, α, β < κ, u ∈ Sα, and v ∈ Sβ, if uRv, then α < β. 4 For all α < β < κ and v ∈ Sβ, there is R ∈ R and u ∈ Sα such that uRv. A branch through S is a set b ⊆ {{α} × λα | α < κ} such that, for some R ∈ R, b is linearly ordered by R. b is a cofinal branch if, for cofinally many α < κ, b ∩ {α} × λα = ∅.

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch.

Slide 42

Slide 42 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch. A strong κ-system with 1 relation is precisely a κ-tree, so the strong system property implies the tree property.

Slide 43

Slide 43 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch. A strong κ-system with 1 relation is precisely a κ-tree, so the strong system property implies the tree property. Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. The following are equivalent:

Slide 44

Slide 44 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch. A strong κ-system with 1 relation is precisely a κ-tree, so the strong system property implies the tree property. Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. The following are equivalent: 1 κ has the strong system property.

Slide 45

Slide 45 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch. A strong κ-system with 1 relation is precisely a κ-tree, so the strong system property implies the tree property. Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. The following are equivalent: 1 κ has the strong system property. 2 κ has the robust strong system property.

Slide 46

Slide 46 text

The strong system property Definition Let κ be a regular, uncountable cardinal. κ has the strong system property if every strong κ-system S with |RS|+ < κ has a cofinal branch. A strong κ-system with 1 relation is precisely a κ-tree, so the strong system property implies the tree property. Theorem (LH) Suppose κ is a regular, uncountable cardinal. The following are equivalent: 1 κ has the strong system property. 2 κ has the robust strong system property. 3 κ has the robust strong system property for systems with countably many relations.

Slide 47

Slide 47 text

The strong system property Thus, the strong system property implies the robust tree property.

Slide 48

Slide 48 text

The strong system property Thus, the strong system property implies the robust tree property. Also, if κ is inaccessible, then the strong system property is equivalent to weak compactness and hence to the tree property.

Slide 49

Slide 49 text

The strong system property Thus, the strong system property implies the robust tree property. Also, if κ is inaccessible, then the strong system property is equivalent to weak compactness and hence to the tree property. Theorem (LH) It is consistent, relative to large cardinals, that the strong system property holds at ℵω2+1 .

Slide 50

Slide 50 text

The strong system property Thus, the strong system property implies the robust tree property. Also, if κ is inaccessible, then the strong system property is equivalent to weak compactness and hence to the tree property. Theorem (LH) It is consistent, relative to large cardinals, that the strong system property holds at ℵω2+1 . The proof of this theorem uses a forcing notion due to Magidor and Shelah and is heavily indebted to work of Fontanella and Magidor.

Slide 51

Slide 51 text

The strong system property Thus, the strong system property implies the robust tree property. Also, if κ is inaccessible, then the strong system property is equivalent to weak compactness and hence to the tree property. Theorem (LH) It is consistent, relative to large cardinals, that the strong system property holds at ℵω2+1 . The proof of this theorem uses a forcing notion due to Magidor and Shelah and is heavily indebted to work of Fontanella and Magidor. Theorem (LH) Fix α < ω2. It is consistent, relative to large cardinals, that ℵω2+1 has the strong system property for all strong systems S with |RS| ≤ ℵα but ℵω2+1 fails to have the full strong system property.

Slide 52

Slide 52 text

Questions Question Can ℵω+1 have the strong system property?

Slide 53

Slide 53 text

Questions Question Can ℵω+1 have the strong system property? Question Is the strong system property equivalent to the robust tree property?

Slide 54

Slide 54 text

Questions Question Can ℵω+1 have the strong system property? Question Is the strong system property equivalent to the robust tree property? Question Is the tree property equivalent to the strong system property for systems with countably many relations?

Slide 55

Slide 55 text

Thank you!