Sigma-Prikry forcing. III: Down to _

DOI10.1016/J.AIM.2023.109377MaRDI QIDQ6147113zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Alejandro Poveda, Assaf Rinot, Dima Sinapova

Publication date 1 February 2024

Published in Advances in Mathematics (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.10501

zbMATH Keywords

iterated forcing Sigma-Prikry forcing singular cardinals hypothesis stationary reflection

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Ordered sets and their cofinalities; pcf theory (03E04) Consistency and independence results (03E35)

Abstract: We prove the consistency of the failure of the singular cardinals hypothesis at

a l e p h_{o} m e g a

together with the reflection of all stationary subsets of

a l e p h_{o m e g a + 1}

. This shows that two classic results of Magidor (from 1977 and 1982) can hold simultaneously.

Review text

This is the last part of a serious of three papers. In the first two parts the authors introduced and studied \(\Sigma\)-Prikry forcing. They developed a framework for iteration of \(\Sigma\)-Prikry forcings. Here they extend the machinery developed in the first two papers, to support interleaved collapses. This new class is called \((\Sigma,\mathbb{S})\)-Prikry forcing. Iterating \((\Sigma,\mathbb{S})\)-Prikry forcing over a suitable ground model they show that Magidor's compactness and incompactness results can co-exists: Main Theorem: Assuming the consistency of infinitely many supercompact cardinals, it is consistent that all of the following hold: \begin{itemize} \item[(1)] \(2^{\aleph_n} = \aleph_{n+1}\) for all \(n<\omega\), \item[(2)] \(2^{\aleph_{\omega}} = \aleph_{\omega+2}\); \item[(3)] every stationary subset of \(\aleph_{\omega+1}\) reflects. \end{itemize}

Recommendations

Cites work

Cited in

(1)

Two results on extendible cardinals

This page was built for publication: Sigma-Prikry forcing. III: Down to \(\aleph_{\omega}\)

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6147113)