Difference between revisions of "L of V lambda+1"
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The large cardinal axiom of the title asserts that some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:V_{\lambda+1}\to V_{\lambda+1}$ extends to a non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$, where $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ is the transitive proper class obtained by starting with $V_{\lambda+1}$ and forming the constructible hierarchy over $V_{\lambda+1}$ in the usual fashion. An alternate, but equivalent formulation asserts the existence of some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$ with $cr(j) < \lambda$. The critical point assumption is essential for the large cardinal strength as otherwise the axiom would follow from the existence of some measurable cardinal above $\lambda$. The axiom is of [[rank into rank]] type, despite its formulation as an embedding between proper classes, and embeddings witnessing the axiom known as $I0$ embeddings. | The large cardinal axiom of the title asserts that some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:V_{\lambda+1}\to V_{\lambda+1}$ extends to a non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$, where $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ is the transitive proper class obtained by starting with $V_{\lambda+1}$ and forming the constructible hierarchy over $V_{\lambda+1}$ in the usual fashion. An alternate, but equivalent formulation asserts the existence of some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$ with $cr(j) < \lambda$. The critical point assumption is essential for the large cardinal strength as otherwise the axiom would follow from the existence of some measurable cardinal above $\lambda$. The axiom is of [[rank into rank]] type, despite its formulation as an embedding between proper classes, and embeddings witnessing the axiom known as $I0$ embeddings. | ||
− | Originally formulated by Woodin in order to establish the relative consistency of a strong determinacy hypothesis, it is now known to be obsolete for this purpose (it is far stronger than necessary). Nevertheless, research on the axiom and its variants is still widely pursued and there are numerous intriguing open questions regarding the axiom and its variants, see . | + | Originally formulated by Woodin in order to establish the relative consistency of a strong [[determinacy]] hypothesis, it is now known to be obsolete for this purpose (it is far stronger than necessary). Nevertheless, research on the axiom and its variants is still widely pursued and there are numerous intriguing open questions regarding the axiom and its variants, see . |
The axiom subsumes a hierarchy of the strongest large cardinals not known to be inconsistent with $ZFC$ and so is seen as ``straining the limits of consistency" <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>. An immediate observation due to the [[Kunen inconsistency]] is that, under the $I0$ axiom, $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ ''cannot'' satisfy the axiom of choice. | The axiom subsumes a hierarchy of the strongest large cardinals not known to be inconsistent with $ZFC$ and so is seen as ``straining the limits of consistency" <cite>Kanamori2009:HigherInfinite</cite>. An immediate observation due to the [[Kunen inconsistency]] is that, under the $I0$ axiom, $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ ''cannot'' satisfy the axiom of choice. |
Revision as of 01:00, 3 October 2017
The large cardinal axiom of the title asserts that some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:V_{\lambda+1}\to V_{\lambda+1}$ extends to a non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$, where $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ is the transitive proper class obtained by starting with $V_{\lambda+1}$ and forming the constructible hierarchy over $V_{\lambda+1}$ in the usual fashion. An alternate, but equivalent formulation asserts the existence of some non-trivial elementary embedding $j:L(V_{\lambda+1})\to L(V_{\lambda+1})$ with $cr(j) < \lambda$. The critical point assumption is essential for the large cardinal strength as otherwise the axiom would follow from the existence of some measurable cardinal above $\lambda$. The axiom is of rank into rank type, despite its formulation as an embedding between proper classes, and embeddings witnessing the axiom known as $I0$ embeddings.
Originally formulated by Woodin in order to establish the relative consistency of a strong determinacy hypothesis, it is now known to be obsolete for this purpose (it is far stronger than necessary). Nevertheless, research on the axiom and its variants is still widely pursued and there are numerous intriguing open questions regarding the axiom and its variants, see .
The axiom subsumes a hierarchy of the strongest large cardinals not known to be inconsistent with $ZFC$ and so is seen as ``straining the limits of consistency" [1]. An immediate observation due to the Kunen inconsistency is that, under the $I0$ axiom, $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ cannot satisfy the axiom of choice.
Contents
The $L(V_{\lambda+1})$ Hierarchy
Relation to the $I1$ Axiom
Ultrapower Reformulation
Similarities with $L(\mathbb{R})$ under Determinacy
Strengthenings of $I0$ and Woodin's $E_\alpha(V_{\lambda+1})$ Sequence
References
- 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
This article is a stub. Please help us to improve Cantor's Attic by adding information.