BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Joel David Hamkins

Joel David Hamkins appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
math.LOmath.COLogic in Computer Sciencemath.NT

Catalog footprint

What is connected

43works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

43 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Categorical large cardinals and the tension between categoricity and set-theoretic reflection

Inspired by Zermelo's quasi-categoricity result characterizing the models of second-order Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory $\text{ZFC}_2$, we investigate when those models are fully categorical, characterized by the addition to $\text{ZFC}_2$ either of a first-order sentence, a first-order theory, a second-order sentence or a second-order theory. Thus we mount an analysis of the categorical large cardinals. This mathematical analysis leads naturally to philosophical issues concerning structuralism and realism, including especially the tension between categoricity and reflection. Ultimately we identify grounds for the preference of noncategoricity in one's foundations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Nonlinearity and illfoundedness in the hierarchy of large cardinal consistency strength

Many set theorists point to the linearity phenomenon in the hierarchy of consistency strength, by which natural theories tend to be linearly ordered and indeed well ordered by consistency strength. Why should it be linear? In this paper I present counterexamples, natural instances of nonlinearity and illfoundedness in the hierarchy of large cardinal consistency strength, as natural or as nearly natural as I can make them. I present diverse cautious enumerations of ZFC and large cardinal set theories, which exhibit incomparability and illfoundedness in consistency strength, and yet, I argue, are natural. I consider the philosophical role played by "natural" in the linearity phenomenon, arguing ultimately that we should abandon empty naturality talk and aim instead to make precise the mathematical and logical features we had found desirable.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Bi-interpretation in weak set theories

In contrast to the robust mutual interpretability phenomenon in set theory, Ali Enayat proved that bi-interpretation is absent: distinct theories extending ZF are never bi-interpretable and models of ZF are bi-interpretable only when they are isomorphic. Nevertheless, for natural weaker set theories, we prove, including Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory $\text{ZFC}^-$ without power set and Zermelo set theory Z, there are nontrivial instances of bi-interpretation. Specifically, there are well-founded models of $\text{ZFC}^-$ that are bi-interpretable, but not isomorphic---even $\langle H_{ω_1},\in\rangle$ and $\langle H_{ω_2},\in\rangle$ can be bi-interpretable---and there are distinct bi-interpretable theories extending $\text{ZFC}^-$. Similarly, using a construction of Mathias, we prove that every model of ZF is bi-interpretable with a model of Zermelo set theory in which the replacement axiom fails.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Choiceless large cardinals and set-theoretic potentialism

We define a potentialist system of ZF-structures, that is, a collection of possible worlds in the language of ZF connected by a binary accessibility relation, achieving a potentialist account of the full background set-theoretic universe $V$. The definition involves Berkeley cardinals, the strongest known large cardinal axioms, inconsistent with the Axiom of Choice. In fact, as background theory we assume just ZF. It turns out that the propositional modal assertions which are valid at every world of our system are exactly those in the modal theory S4.2. Moreover, we characterize the worlds satisfying the potentialist maximality principle, and thus the modal theory S5, both for assertions in the language of ZF and for assertions in the full potentialist language.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Modal model theory

We introduce the subject of modal model theory, where one studies a mathematical structure within a class of similar structures under an extension concept that gives rise to mathematically natural notions of possibility and necessity. A statement $φ$ is possible in a structure (written $\Diamondφ$) if $φ$ is true in some extension of that structure, and $φ$ is necessary (written $\Boxφ$) if it is true in all extensions of the structure. A principal case for us will be the class Mod(T) of all models of a given theory T---all graphs, all groups, all fields, or what have you---considered under the substructure relation. In this article, we aim to develop the resulting modal model theory. The class of all graphs is a particularly insightful case illustrating the remarkable power of the modal vocabulary, for the modal language of graph theory can express connectedness, $k$-colorability, finiteness, countability, size continuum, size $\aleph_1$, $\aleph_2$, $\aleph_ω$, $\beth_ω$, first $\beth$-fixed point, first $\beth$-hyper-fixed-point and much more. A graph obeys the maximality principle $\Diamond\Boxφ(a)\toφ(a)$ with parameters if and only if it satisfies the theory of the countable random graph, and it satisfies the maximality principle for sentences if and only if it is universal for finite graphs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Representing Ordinal Numbers with Arithmetically Interesting Sets of Real Numbers

For a real number $x$ and set of natural numbers $A$, define $x \ast A := \{ x a \bmod 1: a\in A\}\subseteq [0,1).$ We consider relationships between $x$, $A$, and the order-type of $x\ast A$. For example, for every irrational $x$ and order-type $α$, there is an $A$ with $x\ast A \simeq α$, but if $α$ is a well order, then $A$ must be a thin set. If, however, $A$ is restricted to be a subset of the powers of 2, then not every order type is possible, although arbitrarily large countable well orders arise.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

Set-Theoretic Blockchains

Given a countable model of set theory, we study the structure of its generic multiverse, the collection of its forcing extensions and ground models, ordered by inclusion. Mostowski showed that any finite poset embeds into the generic multiverse while preserving the nonexistence of upper bounds. We obtain several improvements of his result, using what we call the blockchain construction to build generic objects with varying degrees of mutual genericity. The method accommodates certain infinite posets, and we can realize these embeddings via a wide variety of forcing notions, while providing control over lower bounds as well. We also give a generalization to class forcing in the context of second-order set theory, and exhibit some further structure in the generic multiverse, such as the existence of exact pairs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2018arXiv

Inner-model reflection principles

We introduce and consider the inner-model reflection principle, which asserts that whenever a statement $φ(a)$ in the first-order language of set theory is true in the set-theoretic universe $V$, then it is also true in a proper inner model $W\subsetneq V$. A stronger principle, the ground-model reflection principle, asserts that any such $φ(a)$ true in $V$ is also true in some non-trivial ground model of the universe with respect to set forcing. These principles each express a form of width reflection in contrast to the usual height reflection of the Lévy-Montague reflection theorem. They are each equiconsistent with ZFC and indeed $Π_2$-conservative over ZFC, being forceable by class forcing while preserving any desired rank-initial segment of the universe. Furthermore, the inner-model reflection principle is a consequence of the existence of sufficient large cardinals, and lightface formulations of the reflection principles follow from the maximality principle MP and from the inner-model hypothesis IMH. We also consider some questions concerning the expressibility of the principles.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Destruction or Preservation As You Like It

The Gap Forcing Theorem, a key contribution of this paper, implies essentially that after any reverse Easton iteration of closed forcing, such as the Laver preparation, every supercompactness measure on a supercompact cardinal extends a measure from the ground model. Thus, such forcing can create no new supercompact cardinals, and, if the GCH holds, neither can it increase the degree of supercompactness of any cardinal; in particular, it can create no new measurable cardinals. In a crescendo of what I call exact preservation theorems, I use this new technology to perform a kind of partial Laver preparation, and thereby finely control the class of posets which preserve a supercompact cardinal. Eventually, I prove the `As You Like It' Theorem, which asserts that the class of ${<}κ$-directed closed posets which preserve a supercompact cardinal $κ$ can be made by forcing to conform with any pre-selected local definition which respects the equivalence of forcing. Along the way I separate completely the levels of the superdestructibility hierarchy, and, in an epilogue, prove that the notions of fragility and superdestructibility are orthogonal---all four combinations are possible.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Open determinacy for class games

The principle of open determinacy for class games---two-player games of perfect information with plays of length $ω$, where the moves are chosen from a possibly proper class, such as games on the ordinals---is not provable in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory ZFC or Gödel-Bernays set theory GBC, if these theories are consistent, because provably in ZFC there is a definable open proper class game with no definable winning strategy. In fact, the principle of open determinacy and even merely clopen determinacy for class games implies Con(ZFC) and iterated instances Con(Con(ZFC)) and more, because it implies that there is a satisfaction class for first-order truth and indeed a transfinite tower of truth predicates for iterated truth-about-truth, relative to any class parameter. This is perhaps explained, in light of the Tarskian recursive definition of truth, by the more general fact that the principle of clopen determinacy is exactly equivalent over GBC to the principle of elementary transfinite recursion ETR over well-founded class relations. Meanwhile, the principle of open determinacy for class games is provable in the stronger theory GBC+$Π^1_1$-comprehension, a proper fragment of Kelley-Morse set theory KM.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Set-theoretic mereology

We consider a set-theoretic version of mereology based on the inclusion relation $\subseteq$ and analyze how well it might serve as a foundation of mathematics. After establishing the non-definability of $\in$ from $\subseteq$, we identify the natural axioms for $\subseteq$-based mereology, which constitute a finitely axiomatizable, complete, decidable theory. Ultimately, for these reasons, we conclude that this form of set-theoretic mereology cannot by itself serve as a foundation of mathematics. Meanwhile, augmented forms of set-theoretic mereology, such as that obtained by adding the singleton operator, are foundationally robust.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Small Forcing Makes Any Cardinal Superdestructible

Small forcing always ruins the indestructibility of an indestructible supercompact cardinal. In fact, after small forcing, any cardinal $κ$ becomes superdestructible---any further ${<}κ$-closed forcing which adds a subset to $κ$ will destroy the measurability, even the weak compactness, of $κ$. Nevertheless, after small forcing indestructible cardinals remain resurrectible, but never strongly resurrectible.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Incomparable $ω_1$-like models of set theory

We show that the analogues of the Hamkins embedding theorems, proved for the countable models of set theory, do not hold when extended to the uncountable realm of $ω_1$-like models of set theory. Specifically, under the $\diamondsuit$ hypothesis and suitable consistency assumptions, we show that there is a family of $2^{ω_1}$ many $ω_1$-like models of ZFC, all with the same ordinals, that are pairwise incomparable under embeddability; there can be a transitive $ω_1$-like model of ZFC that does not embed into its own constructible universe; and there can be an $ω_1$-like model of PA whose structure of hereditarily finite sets is not universal for the $ω_1$-like models of set theory.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Upward closure and amalgamation in the generic multiverse of a countable model of set theory

I prove several theorems concerning upward closure and amalgamation in the generic multiverse of a countable transitive model of set theory. Every such model $W$ has forcing extensions $W[c]$ and $W[d]$ by adding a Cohen real, which cannot be amalgamated in any further extension, but some nontrivial forcing notions have all their extensions amalgamable. An increasing chain $W[G_0]\subseteq W[G_1]\subseteq\cdots$ has an upper bound $W[H]$ if and only if the forcing had uniformly bounded essential size in $W$. Every chain $W\subseteq W[c_0]\subseteq W[c_1]\subseteq\cdots$ of extensions adding Cohen reals is bounded above by $W[d]$ for some $W$-generic Cohen real $d$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

What is the theory ZFC without power set?

We show that the theory ZFC-, consisting of the usual axioms of ZFC but with the power set axiom removed-specifically axiomatized by extensionality, foundation, pairing, union, infinity, separation, replacement and the assertion that every set can be well-ordered-is weaker than commonly supposed and is inadequate to establish several basic facts often desired in its context. For example, there are models of ZFC- in which $ω_1$ is singular, in which every set of reals is countable, yet $ω_1$ exists, in which there are sets of reals of every size $\aleph_n$, but none of size $\aleph_ω$, and therefore, in which the collection axiom sceme fails; there are models of ZFC- for which the Los theorem fails, even when the ultrapower is well-founded and the measure exists inside the model; there are models of ZFC- for which the Gaifman theorem fails, in that there is an embedding $j:M\to N$ of ZFC- models that is $Σ_1$-elementary and cofinal, but not elementary; there are elementary embeddings $j:M\to N$ of ZFC- models whose cofinal restriction $j:M\to \bigcup j``M$ is not elementary. Moreover, the collection of formulas that are provably equivalent in ZFC- to a $Σ_1$-formula or a $Π_1$-formula is not closed under bounded quantification. Nevertheless, these deficits of ZFC- are completely repaired by strengthening it to the theory $ZFC^-$, obtained by using collection rather than replacement in the axiomatization above. These results extend prior work of Zarach.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Algebraicity and implicit definability in set theory

We analyze the effect of replacing several natural uses of definability in set theory by the weaker model-theoretic notion of algebraicity. We find, for example, that the class of hereditarily ordinal algebraic sets is the same as the class of hereditarily ordinal definable sets, that is, HOA = HOD. Moreover, we show that every (pointwise) algebraic model of ZF is actually pointwise definable. Finally, we consider the implicitly constructible universe Imp---an algebraic analogue of the constructible universe---which is obtained by iteratively adding not only the sets that are definable over what has been built so far, but also those that are algebraic (or equivalently, implicitly definable) over the existing structure. While we know Imp can differ from L, the subtler properties of this new inner model are just now coming to light. Many questions remain open.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Every countable model of set theory embeds into its own constructible universe

The main theorem of this article is that every countable model of set theory M, including every well-founded model, is isomorphic to a submodel of its own constructible universe. In other words, there is an embedding $j:M\to L^M$ that is elementary for quantifier-free assertions. The proof uses universal digraph combinatorics, including an acyclic version of the countable random digraph, which I call the countable random Q-graded digraph, and higher analogues arising as uncountable Fraisse limits, leading to the hypnagogic digraph, a set-homogeneous, class-universal, surreal-numbers-graded acyclic class digraph, closely connected with the surreal numbers. The proof shows that $L^M$ contains a submodel that is a universal acyclic digraph of rank $Ord^M$. The method of proof also establishes that the countable models of set theory are linearly pre-ordered by embeddability: for any two countable models of set theory, one of them is isomorphic to a submodel of the other. Indeed, they are pre-well-ordered by embedability in order-type exactly $ω_1+1$. Specifically, the countable well-founded models are ordered by embeddability in accordance with the heights of their ordinals; every shorter model embeds into every taller model; every model of set theory $M$ is universal for all countable well-founded binary relations of rank at most $Ord^M$; and every ill-founded model of set theory is universal for all countable acyclic binary relations. Finally, strengthening a classical theorem of Ressayre, the same proof method shows that if $M$ is any nonstandard model of PA, then every countable model of set theory---in particular, every model of ZFC---is isomorphic to a submodel of the hereditarily finite sets $HF^M$ of $M$. Indeed, $HF^M$ is universal for all countable acyclic binary relations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Set-Theoretic Geology

A ground of the universe V is a transitive proper class W subset V, such that W is a model of ZFC and V is obtained by set forcing over W, so that V = W[G] for some W-generic filter G subset P in W . The model V satisfies the ground axiom GA if there are no such W properly contained in V . The model W is a bedrock of V if W is a ground of V and satisfies the ground axiom. The mantle of V is the intersection of all grounds of V . The generic mantle of V is the intersection of all grounds of all set-forcing extensions of V . The generic HOD, written gHOD, is the intersection of all HODs of all set-forcing extensions. The generic HOD is always a model of ZFC, and the generic mantle is always a model of ZF. Every model of ZFC is the mantle and generic mantle of another model of ZFC. We prove this theorem while also controlling the HOD of the final model, as well as the generic HOD. Iteratively taking the mantle penetrates down through the inner mantles to what we call the outer core, what remains when all outer layers of forcing have been stripped away. Many fundamental questions remain open.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Superstrong and other large cardinals are never Laver indestructible

Superstrong cardinals are never Laver indestructible. Similarly, almost huge cardinals, huge cardinals, superhuge cardinals, rank-into-rank cardinals, extendible cardinals, 1-extendible cardinals, 0-extendible cardinals, weakly superstrong cardinals, uplifting cardinals, pseudo-uplifting cardinals, superstrongly unfoldable cardinals, Σ_n-reflecting cardinals, Σ_n-correct cardinals and Σ_n-extendible cardinals (all for n>2) are never Laver indestructible. In fact, all these large cardinal properties are superdestructible: if κ exhibits any of them, with corresponding target θ, then in any forcing extension arising from nontrivial strategically <κ-closed forcing Q in V_θ, the cardinal κ will exhibit none of the large cardinal properties with target θ or larger.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Transfinite game values in infinite chess

We investigate the transfinite game values arising in infinite chess, providing both upper and lower bounds on the supremum of these values---the omega one of chess---with two senses depending on whether one considers only finite positions or also positions with infinitely many pieces. For lower bounds, we present specific infinite positions with transfinite game values of omega, omega^2, omega^2 times k, and omega^3. By embedding trees into chess, we show that there is a computable infinite chess position that is a win for white if the players are required to play according to a deterministic computable strategy, but which is a draw without that restriction. Finally, we prove that every countable ordinal arises as the game value of a position in infinite three-dimensional chess, and consequently the omega one of infinite three-dimensional chess is as large as it can be, namely, true omega one.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

The least weakly compact cardinal can be unfoldable, weakly measurable and nearly $θ$-supercompact

We prove from suitable large cardinal hypotheses that the least weakly compact cardinal can be unfoldable, weakly measurable and even nearly $θ$-supercompact, for any desired $θ$. In addition, we prove several global results showing how the entire class of weakly compact cardinals, a proper class, can be made to coincide with the class of unfoldable cardinals, with the class of weakly measurable cardinals or with the class of nearly $θ_κ$-supercompact cardinals $κ$, for nearly any desired function $κ\mapstoθ_κ$. These results answer several questions that had been open in the literature and extend to these large cardinals the identity-crises phenomenon, first identified by Magidor with the strongly compact cardinals.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

A multiverse perspective on the axiom of constructiblity

I shall argue that the commonly held V not equal L via maximize position, which rejects the axiom of constructibility V = L on the basis that it is restrictive, implicitly takes a stand in the pluralist debate in the philosophy of set theory by presuming an absolute background concept of ordinal. The argument appears to lose its force, in contrast, on an upwardly extensible concept of set, in light of the various facts showing that models of set theory generally have extensions to models of V = L inside larger set-theoretic universes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Generalizations of the Kunen Inconsistency

We present several generalizations of the well-known Kunen inconsistency that there is no nontrivial elementary embedding from the set-theoretic universe V to itself. For example, there is no elementary embedding from the universe V to a set-forcing extension V[G], or conversely from V[G] to V, or more generally from one ground model of the universe to another, or between any two models that are eventually stationary correct, or from V to HOD, or conversely from HOD to V, or indeed from any definable class to V, among many other possibilities we consider, including generic embeddings, definable embeddings and results not requiring the axiom of choice. We have aimed in this article for a unified presentation that weaves together some previously known unpublished or folklore results, several due to Woodin and others, along with our new contributions.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Is the dream solution to the continuum hypothesis attainable?

The dream solution of the continuum hypothesis (CH) would be a solution by which we settle the continuum hypothesis on the basis of a newly discovered fundamental principle of set theory, a missing axiom, widely regarded as true. Such a dream solution would indeed be a solution, since we would all accept the new axiom along with its consequences. In this article, however, I argue that such a dream solution to CH is unattainable. The article is adapted from and expands upon material in my article, "The set-theoretic multiverse", to appear in the Review of Symbolic Logic (see arXiv:1108.4223).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Moving up and down in the generic multiverse

We give a brief account of the modal logic of the generic multiverse, which is a bimodal logic with operators corresponding to the relations "is a forcing extension of" and "is a ground model of". The fragment of the first relation is called the modal logic of forcing and was studied by us in earlier work. The fragment of the second relation is called the modal logic of grounds and will be studied here for the first time. In addition, we discuss which combinations of modal logics are possible for the two fragments.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Pointwise Definable Models of Set Theory

A pointwise definable model is one in which every object is definable without parameters. In a model of set theory, this property strengthens V=HOD, but is not first-order expressible. Nevertheless, if ZFC is consistent, then there are continuum many pointwise definable models of ZFC. If there is a transitive model of ZFC, then there are continuum many pointwise definable transitive models of ZFC. What is more, every countable model of ZFC has a class forcing extension that is pointwise definable. Indeed, for the main contribution of this article, every countable model of Godel-Bernays set theory has a pointwise definable extension, in which every set and class is first-order definable without parameters.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Structural connections between a forcing class and its modal logic

The modal logic of forcing arises when one considers a model of set theory in the context of all its forcing extensions, interpreting necessity as "in all forcing extensions" and possibility as "in some forcing extension". In this modal language one may easily express sweeping general forcing principles, such as the assertion that every possibly necessary statement is necessarily possible, which is valid for forcing, or the assertion that every possibly necessary statement is true, which is the maximality principle, a forcing axiom independent of but equiconsistent with ZFC (Stavi-Väänänen, Hamkins). Every definable forcing class similarly gives rise to the corresponding forcing modalities, for which one considers extensions only by forcing notions in that class. In previous work, we proved that if ZFC is consistent, then the ZFC-provably valid principles of the class of all forcing are precisely the assertions of the modal theory S4.2. In this article, we prove that the provably valid principles of collapse forcing, Cohen forcing and other classes are in each case exactly S4.3; the provably valid principles of c.c.c. forcing, proper forcing, and others are each contained within S4.3 and do not contain S4.2; the provably valid principles of countably closed forcing, CH-preserving forcing and others are each exactly S4.2; and the provably valid principles of $ω_1$-preserving forcing are contained within S4.tBA. All these results arise from general structural connections we have identified between a forcing class and the modal logic of forcing to which it gives rise, including the connection between various control statements, such as buttons, switches and ratchets, and their corresponding forcing validities. These structural connections therefore support a forcing-only analysis of other diverse forcing classes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

The mate-in-n problem of infinite chess is decidable

Infinite chess is chess played on an infinite edgeless chessboard. The familiar chess pieces move about according to their usual chess rules, and each player strives to place the opposing king into checkmate. The mate-in-n problem of infinite chess is the problem of determining whether a designated player can force a win from a given finite position in at most n moves. A naive formulation of this problem leads to assertions of high arithmetic complexity with 2n alternating quantifiers---there is a move for white, such that for every black reply, there is a counter-move for white, and so on. In such a formulation, the problem does not appear to be decidable; and one cannot expect to search an infinitely branching game tree even to finite depth. Nevertheless, the main theorem of this article, confirming a conjecture of the first author and C. D. A. Evans, establishes that the mate-in-n problem of infinite chess is computably decidable, uniformly in the position and in n. Furthermore, there is a computable strategy for optimal play from such mate-in-n positions. The proof proceeds by showing that the mate-in-n problem is expressible in what we call the first-order structure of chess, which we prove (in the relevant fragment) is an automatic structure, whose theory is therefore decidable. Indeed, it is definable in Presburger arithmetic. Unfortunately, this resolution of the mate-in-n problem does not appear to settle the decidability of the more general winning-position problem, the problem of determining whether a designated player has a winning strategy from a given position, since a position may admit a winning strategy without any bound on the number of moves required. This issue is connected with transfinite game values in infinite chess, and the exact value of the omega one of chess is not known.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Well-founded Boolean ultrapowers as large cardinal embeddings

Boolean ultrapowers extend the classical ultrapower construction to work with ultrafilters on any complete Boolean algebra, rather than only on a power set algebra. When they are well-founded, the associated Boolean ultrapower embeddings exhibit a large cardinal nature, and the Boolean ultrapower construction thereby unifies two central themes of set theory---forcing and large cardinals---by revealing them to be two facets of a single underlying construction, the Boolean ultrapower.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Inner models with large cardinal features usually obtained by forcing

We construct a variety of inner models exhibiting features usually obtained by forcing over universes with large cardinals. For example, if there is a supercompact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a Laver indestructible supercompact cardinal. If there is a supercompact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a supercompact cardinal κfor which 2^κ=κ^+, another for which 2^κ=κ^++ and another in which the least strongly compact cardinal is supercompact. If there is a strongly compact cardinal, then there is an inner model with a strongly compact cardinal, for which the measurable cardinals are bounded below it and another inner model W with a strongly compact cardinal κ, such that H_{κ^+}^V\subseteq HOD^W. Similar facts hold for supercompact, measurable and strongly Ramsey cardinals. If a cardinal is supercompact up to a weakly iterable cardinal, then there is an inner model of the Proper Forcing Axiom and another inner model with a supercompact cardinal in which GCH+V=HOD holds. Under the same hypothesis, there is an inner model with level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness, and indeed, another in which there is level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness. If a cardinal is strongly compact up to a weakly iterable cardinal, then there is an inner model in which the least measurable cardinal is strongly compact. If there is a weakly iterable limit δof <δ-supercompact cardinals, then there is an inner model with a proper class of Laver-indestructible supercompact cardinals. We describe three general proof methods, which can be used to prove many similar results.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

The Rigid Relation Principle, a New Weak Choice Principle

The rigid relation principle, introduced in this article, asserts that every set admits a rigid binary relation. This follows from the axiom of choice, because well-orders are rigid, but we prove that it is neither equivalent to the axiom of choice nor provable in Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory without the axiom of choice. Thus, it is a new weak choice principle. Nevertheless, the restriction of the principle to sets of reals (among other general instances) is provable without the axiom of choice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

The set-theoretic multiverse

The multiverse view in set theory, introduced and argued for in this article, is the view that there are many distinct concepts of set, each instantiated in a corresponding set-theoretic universe. The universe view, in contrast, asserts that there is an absolute background set concept, with a corresponding absolute set-theoretic universe in which every set-theoretic question has a definite answer. The multiverse position, I argue, explains our experience with the enormous diversity of set-theoretic possibilities, a phenomenon that challenges the universe view. In particular, I argue that the continuum hypothesis is settled on the multiverse view by our extensive knowledge about how it behaves in the multiverse, and as a result it can no longer be settled in the manner formerly hoped for.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2004arXiv

Extensions with the approximation and cover properties have no new large cardinals

If an extension Vbar of V satisfies the delta approximation and cover properties for classes and V is a class in Vbar, then every suitably closed embedding j:Vbar to Nbar in Vbar with critical point above delta restricts to an embedding j|V:V to N amenable to the ground model V. In such extensions, therefore, there are no new large cardinals above delta. This result extends work in math.LO/9808011.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint1997arXiv

Changing the heights of automorphism towers

If $G$ is a centreless group, then $τ(G)$ denotes the height of the automorphism tower of $G$. We prove that it is consistent that for every cardinal $λ$ and every ordinal $α< λ$, there exists a centreless group $G$ such that (a) $τ(G) = α$; and (b) if $β$ is any ordinal such that $1 \leq β< λ$, then there exists a notion of forcing $P$, which preserves cofinalities and cardinalities, such that $τ(G) = β$ in the corresponding generic extension $V^{P}$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access