BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research pathsDiscover
Research tools
Network
Opportunities
Account
Source author record
Alan H. Mekler appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.
Catalog footprint
Research graph
Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
Assume V=L and lambda is regular smaller than the first weakly compact cardinal. Under those circumstances and with arbitrary requirements on the structure of Ext(G,Z) (under well known limitations), we construct an abelian group G of cardinality lambda such that for no G' subseteq G, |G'|< lambda is G/G' free and Ext(G,Z) realizes our requirements.
The essentially non-free spectrum is the class of uncountable cardinals kappa in which there is an essentially non-free algebra of cardinality kappa which is almost free. In L, the essentially non-free spectrum of a variety is entirely determined by whether or not the construction principle holds. In ZFC may be more complicated. For some varieties, such as groups, abelian groups or any variety of modules over a non-left perfect ring, the essentially non-free spectrum contains not only aleph_1 but aleph_n for all n>0. The reason for this being true in ZFC (rather than under some special set theoretic hypotheses) is that these varieties satisfy stronger versions of the construction principle. We conjecture that the hierarchy of construction principles is strict, i.e., that for each n>0 there is a variety which satisfies the n-construction principle but not the n+1-construction principle. In this paper we will show that the 1-construction principle does not imply the 2-construction principle. We prove that, assuming the consistency of some large cardinal hypothesis, it is consistent that a variety has an essentially non-free almost free algebra of cardinality aleph_n if and only if it satisfies the n-construction principle.
In the literature two notions of the word problem for a variety occur. A variety has a decidable word problem if every finitely presented algebra in the variety has a decidable word problem. It has a uniformly decidable word problem if there is an algorithm which given a finite presentation produces an algorithm for solving the word problem of the algebra so presented. A variety is given with finitely many axioms having a decidable, but not uniformly decidable, word problem. Other related examples are given as well.
We show that if 2^{aleph_0} Cohen reals are added to the universe, then for every reduced non-free torsion-free abelian group A of cardinality less than the continuum, there is a prime p so that Ext_p(A, Z) not= 0. In particular if it is consistent that there is a supercompact cardinal, then it is consistent (even with weak CH) that every coseparable group is free. The use of some large cardinal hypothesis is needed.
It is proved consistent with either CH or the negation of CH that there is an aleph_1-separable group of cardinality aleph_1 which does not have a coherent system of projections. It had previously been shown that it is consistent with not CH that every aleph_1-separable group of cardinality aleph_1 does have a coherent system of projections.
We show that if we enrich first order logic by allowing quantification over isomorphisms between definable ordered fields the resulting logic, L(Q_{Of}), is fully compact. In this logic, we can give standard compactness proofs of various results. Next, we attempt to get compactness results for some other logics without recourse to diamond, i.e., all our results are in ZFC. We get the full result for the language where we quantify over automorphisms (isomorphisms) of ordered fields in Theorem 6.4. Unfortunately we are not able to show that the language with quantification over automorphisms of Boolean algebras is compact, but will have to settle for a close relative of that logic. This is theorem 5.1. In section 4 we prove we can construct models in which all relevant automorphism are somewhat definable: 4.1, 4.8 for BA, 4.13 for ordered fields. We also give a new proof of the compactness of another logic -- the one which is obtained when a quantifier Q_{Brch} is added to first order logic which says that a level tree (definitions will be given later) has an infinite branch. This logic was previously shown to be compact, but our proof yields a somewhat stronger result and provides a nice illustration of one of our methods.
A canary tree is a tree of cardinality the continuum which has no uncountable branch, but gains a branch whenever a stationary set is destroyed (without adding reals). Canary trees are important in infinitary model theory. The existence of a canary tree is independent of ZFC + GCH.
The connections between Whitehead groups and uniformization properties were investigated by the third author in [Sh:98]. In particular it was essentially shown there that there is a non-free Whitehead (respectively, aleph_1-coseparable) group of cardinality aleph_1 if and only if there is a ladder system on a stationary subset of omega_1 which satisfies 2-uniformization (respectively, omega-uniformization). These techniques allowed also the proof of various independence and consistency results about Whitehead groups, for example that it is consistent that there is a non-free Whitehead group of cardinality aleph_1 but no non-free aleph_1-coseparable group. However, some natural questions remained open, among them the following two: (i) Is it consistent that the class of W-groups of cardinality aleph_1 is exactly the class of strongly aleph_1-free groups of cardinality aleph_1 ? (ii) If every strongly aleph_1-free group of cardinality aleph_1 is a W-group, are they also all aleph_1-coseparable? In this paper we use the techniques of uniformization to answer the first question in the negative and give a partial affirmative answer to the second question.