Difference between revisions of "Huge"

From Cantor's Attic
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Added sources)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
[[Category:Large cardinal axioms]]
 
[[Category:Large cardinal axioms]]
 
[[Category:Critical points]]
 
[[Category:Critical points]]
Huge cardinals (and their variants) were introduced by Kenneth Kunen in 1978 as a very large cardinal axiom. Each of their variants are [[Vopenka|Vopěnka]] cardinals (that is, Vopěnka's principle holds in their ranks), although they have strictly stronger consistency strength. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
+
Huge cardinals (and their variants) were introduced by Kenneth Kunen in 1978 as a very large cardinal axiom. They were introduced in 1972 by Kenneth Kunen who proved that the consistency of the existence of a huge cardinal implied the consistency of $ZFC+$"there is a $\omega_2$-saturated [[filter|ideal]] over $\omega_1$".
  
= Definitions =
+
== Definitions ==
  
 
Their formulation is similar to that of the formulation of [[superstrong]] cardinals. A huge cardinal is to a [[supercompact]] cardinal as a superstrong cardinal is to a [[strong]] cardinal, more precisely. The definition is part of a generalized phenomenon known as the "double helix", in which for some large cardinal properties $n$-$P_0$ and $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ has less consistency strength than $n$-$P_1$, which has less consistency strength than $n+1$-$P_0$, and so on. This phenomenon is seen only around the [[n-fold variants|$n$-fold variants]] as of modern set theoretic concerns. <cite>Kentaro2007:DoubleHelix</cite>
 
Their formulation is similar to that of the formulation of [[superstrong]] cardinals. A huge cardinal is to a [[supercompact]] cardinal as a superstrong cardinal is to a [[strong]] cardinal, more precisely. The definition is part of a generalized phenomenon known as the "double helix", in which for some large cardinal properties $n$-$P_0$ and $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ has less consistency strength than $n$-$P_1$, which has less consistency strength than $n+1$-$P_0$, and so on. This phenomenon is seen only around the [[n-fold variants|$n$-fold variants]] as of modern set theoretic concerns. <cite>Kentaro2007:DoubleHelix</cite>
Line 10: Line 10:
 
Although they are very large, there is a first-order definition which is equivalent to $n$-hugeness, so the $\theta$-th $n$-huge cardinal is first-order definable whenever $\theta$ is first-order definable. This definition can be seen as a (very strong) strengthening of the first-order definition of [[measurable|measurability]].
 
Although they are very large, there is a first-order definition which is equivalent to $n$-hugeness, so the $\theta$-th $n$-huge cardinal is first-order definable whenever $\theta$ is first-order definable. This definition can be seen as a (very strong) strengthening of the first-order definition of [[measurable|measurability]].
  
== Elementary Embedding Definitions ==
+
=== Elementary embedding definitions ===
  
 
The elementary embedding definitions are somewhat standard. Let $j:V\rightarrow M$ be an [[elementary embedding]] with critical point $\kappa$ such that $M$ is a standard inner model of [[ZFC]]. Then:
 
The elementary embedding definitions are somewhat standard. Let $j:V\rightarrow M$ be an [[elementary embedding]] with critical point $\kappa$ such that $M$ is a standard inner model of [[ZFC]]. Then:
Line 22: Line 22:
 
*$\kappa$ is '''almost huge''', '''huge''', '''super almost huge''', and '''superhuge''' iff it is '''almost $1$-huge''', '''$1$-huge''', etc. respectively.
 
*$\kappa$ is '''almost huge''', '''huge''', '''super almost huge''', and '''superhuge''' iff it is '''almost $1$-huge''', '''$1$-huge''', etc. respectively.
  
== First-order Definition ==
+
=== Ultrafilter definition ===
  
 
The first-order definition of $n$-huge is somewhat similar to [[measurable|measurability]]. Specifically, $\kappa$ is measurable iff there is a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete [[filter|ultrafilter]], $U$, over $\kappa$. A cardinal $\kappa$ is $n$-huge iff there is some cardinal $\lambda$, a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete ultrafilter, $U$, over $\mathcal{P}(\lambda)$, and cardinals $\kappa=\lambda_0<\lambda_1<\lambda_2...<\lambda_{n-1}<\lambda_n=\lambda$ such that:
 
The first-order definition of $n$-huge is somewhat similar to [[measurable|measurability]]. Specifically, $\kappa$ is measurable iff there is a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete [[filter|ultrafilter]], $U$, over $\kappa$. A cardinal $\kappa$ is $n$-huge iff there is some cardinal $\lambda$, a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete ultrafilter, $U$, over $\mathcal{P}(\lambda)$, and cardinals $\kappa=\lambda_0<\lambda_1<\lambda_2...<\lambda_{n-1}<\lambda_n=\lambda$ such that:
Line 30: Line 30:
 
Where $ot(X)$ is the [[Order-isomorphism|order-type]] of the poset $(X,\in)$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite> This definition is, more intuitively, making $U$ very large, like most ultrafilter characterizations of large cardinals ([[supercompact]], [[strongly compact]], etc.).
 
Where $ot(X)$ is the [[Order-isomorphism|order-type]] of the poset $(X,\in)$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite> This definition is, more intuitively, making $U$ very large, like most ultrafilter characterizations of large cardinals ([[supercompact]], [[strongly compact]], etc.).
  
= Consistency Strength and Size =
+
== Consistency strength and size ==
  
 
Hugeness exhibits a phenomenon associated with similarly defined large cardinals (the [[n-fold variants|$n$-fold variants]]) known as the ''double helix''. This phenomenon is when for one $n$-fold variant, letting a cardinal be called $n$-$P_0$ iff it has the property, and another variant, $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ is weaker than $n$-$P_1$, which is weaker than $n+1$-$P_0$. <cite>Kentaro2007:DoubleHelix</cite> In the consistency strength hierarchy, here is where these lay (top being weakest):
 
Hugeness exhibits a phenomenon associated with similarly defined large cardinals (the [[n-fold variants|$n$-fold variants]]) known as the ''double helix''. This phenomenon is when for one $n$-fold variant, letting a cardinal be called $n$-$P_0$ iff it has the property, and another variant, $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ is weaker than $n$-$P_1$, which is weaker than $n+1$-$P_0$. <cite>Kentaro2007:DoubleHelix</cite> In the consistency strength hierarchy, here is where these lay (top being weakest):
Line 46: Line 46:
 
*$n+1$-superstrong
 
*$n+1$-superstrong
  
All huge variants lay at the top of the double helix restricted to some [[Omega|natural number]] $n$, although each are bested by [[rank-into-rank|I3]] cardinals (the [[elementary embedding|critical points]] of the I3 elementary embeddings). In fact, letting $\kappa$ be I3, there is a normal [[filter|ultrafilter]] $U$ over $\kappa$ which contains every cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$ such that for each $n$, $\lambda$ is $n$-huge. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
+
All huge variants lay at the top of the double helix restricted to some [[Omega|natural number]] $n$, although each are bested by [[rank-into-rank|I3]] cardinals (the [[elementary embedding|critical points]] of the I3 elementary embeddings). In fact, every I3 is preceeded by a stationary set of $n$-huge cardinals, for all $n$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
  
Similarly, every huge cardinal $\kappa$ is almost huge, and there is a normal ultrafilter over $\kappa$ which contains every almost huge cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every superhuge cardinal $\kappa$ is [[extendible]] and there is a normal ultrafilter over $\kappa$ which contains every extendible cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every $2$-huge cardinal $\kappa$ has a normal ultrafilter which contains every cardinal $\lambda$ such that $V_\kappa\models\lambda\;\mathrm{is}\;\mathrm{superhuge}$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
+
Similarly, every huge cardinal $\kappa$ is almost huge, and there is a normal measure over $\kappa$ which contains every almost huge cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every superhuge cardinal $\kappa$ is [[extendible]] and there is a normal measure over $\kappa$ which contains every extendible cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every $(n+1)$-huge cardinal $\kappa$ has a normal ultrafilter which contains every cardinal $\lambda$ such that $V_\kappa\models\lambda\;\mathrm{is}\;\mathrm{super n-huge}$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
  
 
In terms of size however, the least $n$-huge cardinal is smaller than the least [[supercompact]] cardinal. Assuming both exist, for any $\kappa$ which is supercompact and has an $n$-huge cardinal above it, there are $\kappa$ many $n$-huge cardinals less than $\kappa$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
 
In terms of size however, the least $n$-huge cardinal is smaller than the least [[supercompact]] cardinal. Assuming both exist, for any $\kappa$ which is supercompact and has an $n$-huge cardinal above it, there are $\kappa$ many $n$-huge cardinals less than $\kappa$. <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
  
Every $n$-huge cardinal is $m$-huge for every $m\leq n$<cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>. Similarly with almost $n$-hugeness, super $n$-hugeness, and super almost $n$-hugeness. Every almost huge cardinal is [[Vopenka|Vopěnka]] (therefore $\mathrm{Con}(\mathrm{ZFC}+VP)$ where $VP$ is Vopěnka's principle). <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
+
Every $n$-huge cardinal is $m$-huge for every $m\leq n$<cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>. Similarly with almost $n$-hugeness, super $n$-hugeness, and super almost $n$-hugeness. Every almost huge cardinal is [[Vopenka|Vopěnka]] (therefore the consistency of the existence of a almost-huge cardinal implies the consistency of Vopěnka's principle). <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>
  
 
{{References}}
 
{{References}}

Revision as of 04:26, 5 November 2017

Huge cardinals (and their variants) were introduced by Kenneth Kunen in 1978 as a very large cardinal axiom. They were introduced in 1972 by Kenneth Kunen who proved that the consistency of the existence of a huge cardinal implied the consistency of $ZFC+$"there is a $\omega_2$-saturated ideal over $\omega_1$".

Definitions

Their formulation is similar to that of the formulation of superstrong cardinals. A huge cardinal is to a supercompact cardinal as a superstrong cardinal is to a strong cardinal, more precisely. The definition is part of a generalized phenomenon known as the "double helix", in which for some large cardinal properties $n$-$P_0$ and $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ has less consistency strength than $n$-$P_1$, which has less consistency strength than $n+1$-$P_0$, and so on. This phenomenon is seen only around the $n$-fold variants as of modern set theoretic concerns. [1]

Although they are very large, there is a first-order definition which is equivalent to $n$-hugeness, so the $\theta$-th $n$-huge cardinal is first-order definable whenever $\theta$ is first-order definable. This definition can be seen as a (very strong) strengthening of the first-order definition of measurability.

Elementary embedding definitions

The elementary embedding definitions are somewhat standard. Let $j:V\rightarrow M$ be an elementary embedding with critical point $\kappa$ such that $M$ is a standard inner model of ZFC. Then:

  • $\kappa$ is almost $n$-huge with target $\lambda$ iff $\lambda=j^n(\kappa)$ and $M$ is closed under all of its sequences of length less than $\lambda$ (that is, $M^{<\lambda}\subset M$).
  • $\kappa$ is $n$-huge with target $\lambda$ iff $\lambda=j^n(\kappa)$ and $M$ is closed under all of its sequences of length $\lambda$ ($M^\lambda\subset M$).
  • $\kappa$ is almost $n$-huge iff it is almost $n$-huge with target $\lambda$ for some $\lambda$.
  • $\kappa$ is $n$-huge iff it is $n$-huge with target $\lambda$ for some $\lambda$.
  • $\kappa$ is super almost $n$-huge iff for every $\gamma$, there is some $\lambda>\gamma$ for which $\kappa$ is almost $n$-huge with target $\lambda$ (that is, the target can be made arbitrarily large).
  • $\kappa$ is super $n$-huge iff for every $\gamma$, there is some $\lambda>\gamma$ for which $\kappa$ is $n$-huge with target $\lambda$.
  • $\kappa$ is almost huge, huge, super almost huge, and superhuge iff it is almost $1$-huge, $1$-huge, etc. respectively.

Ultrafilter definition

The first-order definition of $n$-huge is somewhat similar to measurability. Specifically, $\kappa$ is measurable iff there is a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete ultrafilter, $U$, over $\kappa$. A cardinal $\kappa$ is $n$-huge iff there is some cardinal $\lambda$, a nonprinciple $\kappa$-complete ultrafilter, $U$, over $\mathcal{P}(\lambda)$, and cardinals $\kappa=\lambda_0<\lambda_1<\lambda_2...<\lambda_{n-1}<\lambda_n=\lambda$ such that:

$$\forall i<n\forall x\subseteq\lambda(ot(x\cap\lambda_{i+1})=\lambda_i\rightarrow x\in U)$$

Where $ot(X)$ is the order-type of the poset $(X,\in)$. [2] This definition is, more intuitively, making $U$ very large, like most ultrafilter characterizations of large cardinals (supercompact, strongly compact, etc.).

Consistency strength and size

Hugeness exhibits a phenomenon associated with similarly defined large cardinals (the $n$-fold variants) known as the double helix. This phenomenon is when for one $n$-fold variant, letting a cardinal be called $n$-$P_0$ iff it has the property, and another variant, $n$-$P_1$, $n$-$P_0$ is weaker than $n$-$P_1$, which is weaker than $n+1$-$P_0$. [1] In the consistency strength hierarchy, here is where these lay (top being weakest):

All huge variants lay at the top of the double helix restricted to some natural number $n$, although each are bested by I3 cardinals (the critical points of the I3 elementary embeddings). In fact, every I3 is preceeded by a stationary set of $n$-huge cardinals, for all $n$. [2]

Similarly, every huge cardinal $\kappa$ is almost huge, and there is a normal measure over $\kappa$ which contains every almost huge cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every superhuge cardinal $\kappa$ is extendible and there is a normal measure over $\kappa$ which contains every extendible cardinal $\lambda<\kappa$. Every $(n+1)$-huge cardinal $\kappa$ has a normal ultrafilter which contains every cardinal $\lambda$ such that $V_\kappa\models\lambda\;\mathrm{is}\;\mathrm{super n-huge}$. [2]

In terms of size however, the least $n$-huge cardinal is smaller than the least supercompact cardinal. Assuming both exist, for any $\kappa$ which is supercompact and has an $n$-huge cardinal above it, there are $\kappa$ many $n$-huge cardinals less than $\kappa$. [2]

Every $n$-huge cardinal is $m$-huge for every $m\leq n$[2]. Similarly with almost $n$-hugeness, super $n$-hugeness, and super almost $n$-hugeness. Every almost huge cardinal is Vopěnka (therefore the consistency of the existence of a almost-huge cardinal implies the consistency of Vopěnka's principle). [2]

References

  1. Kentaro, Sato. Double helix in large large cardinals and iteration ofelementary embeddings. , 2007. www   bibtex
  2. Kanamori, Akihiro. The higher infinite. Second, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2009. (Large cardinals in set theory from their beginnings, Paperback reprint of the 2003 edition) www   bibtex
Main library