Indestructibility and level by level equivalence and inequivalence

If κ < λ are such that κ is indestructibly supercompact and λ is 2^λ supercompact, it is known from [4] that

• {δ < κ | δ is a measurable cardinal which is not a limit of measurable cardinals and δ violates level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness}

must be unbounded in κ. On the other hand, using a variant of the argument used to establish this fact, it is possible to prove that if κ < λ are such that κ is indestructibly supercompact and λ is measurable, then

• {δ < κ | δ is a measurable cardinal which is not a limit of measurable cardinals and δ satisfies level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness}

must be unbounded in κ. The two aforementioned phenomena, however, need not occur in a universe with an indestructibly supercompact cardinal and sufficiently few large cardinals. In particular, we show how to construct a model with an indestructibly supercompact cardinal κ in which if δ < κ is a measurable cardinal which is not a limit of measurable cardinals, then δ must satisfy level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness. We also, however, show how to construct a model with an indestructibly supercompact cardinal κ in which if δ < κ is a measurable cardinal which is not a limit of measurable cardinals, then δ must violate level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness. (© 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Identity crises and strong compactness III: Woodin cardinals

We show that it is consistent, relative to n ∈ ω supercompact cardinals, for the strongly compact and measurable Woodin cardinals to coincide precisely. In particular, it is consistent for the first n strongly compact cardinals to be the first n measurable Woodin cardinals, with no cardinal above the n^th strongly compact cardinal being measurable. In addition, we show that it is consistent, relative to a proper class of supercompact cardinals, for the strongly compact cardinals and the cardinals which are both strong cardinals and Woodin cardinals to coincide precisely. We also show how the techniques employed can be used to prove additional theorems about possible relationships between Woodin cardinals and strongly compact cardinals. The first author's research was partially supported by PSC-CUNY Grant 66489-00-35 and a CUNY Collaborative Incentive Grant.     

On the least strongly compact cardinal

We prove that under the assumption of a supercompact cardinal κ which is a limit of supercompact cardinals, for any increasing Σ₂ function φ the set {∂<κ:∂ is at least φ(∂) supercompact, is strongly compact, yet is not fully supercompact} is unbounded in κ. We then use ideas of Magidor to show that under the hypotheses of a supercompact cardinal which is a limit of supercompact cardinals it is consistent for the least strongly compact cardinal κ₀ to be at least φ(κ₀) supercompact yet not to be fully supercompact, where φ is again an increasing Σ₂ function which also meets certain other technical restrictions. The author wishes to thank Menachem Magidor for helpful conversations and suggestions in method which were used in the proof of Theorem 2.     

More on the Least Strongly Compact Cardinal

We show that it is consistent, relative to a supercompact limit of supercompact cardinals, for the least strongly compact cardinal k to be both the least measurable cardinal and to be > 2^k supercompact.     

Supercompactness and measurable limits of strong cardinals II: Applications to level by level equivalence

We construct models for the level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness in which for κ the least supercompact cardinal and δ ≤ κ any cardinal which is either a strong cardinal or a measurable limit of strong cardinals, 2^δ > δ ⁺ and δ is < 2^δ supercompact. In these models, the structure of the class of supercompact cardinals can be arbitrary, and the size of the power set of κ can essentially be made as large as desired. This extends and generalizes [5, Theorem 2] and [4, Theorem 4]. We also sketch how our techniques can be used to establish a weak indestructibility result. (© 2006 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Supercompactness and level by level equivalence are compatible with indestructibility for strong compactness

It is known that if are such that κ is indestructibly supercompact and λ is 2^λ supercompact, then level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness fails. We prove a theorem which points towards this result being best possible. Specifically, we show that relative to the existence of a supercompact cardinal, there is a model for level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness containing a supercompact cardinal κ in which κ’s strong compactness is indestructible under κ-directed closed forcing. The author’s research was partially supported by PSC-CUNY Grant 66489-00-35 and a CUNY Collaborative Incentive Grant.     

Indestructibility,HOD, and the Ground Axiom

Let φ₁ stand for the statement V = HOD and φ₂ stand for the Ground Axiom. Suppose T_i for i = 1, …, 4 are the theories “ZFC + φ₁ + φ₂,” “ZFC + ¬φ₁ + φ₂,” “ZFC + φ₁ + ¬φ₂,” and “ZFC + ¬φ₁ + ¬φ₂” respectively. We show that if κ is indestructibly supercompact and λ > κ is inaccessible, then for i = 1, …, 4, A_i = _df{δ < κ∣δ is an inaccessible cardinal which is not a limit of inaccessible cardinals and V_δ?T_i} must be unbounded in κ. The large cardinal hypothesis on λ is necessary, as we further demonstrate by constructing via forcing four models in which A_i = ?? for i = 1, …, 4. In each of these models, there is an indestructibly supercompact cardinal κ, and no cardinal δ > κ is inaccessible. We show it is also the case that if κ is indestructibly supercompact, then V_κ?T₁, so by reflection, B₁ = _df{δ < κ∣δ is an inaccessible limit of inaccessible cardinals and V_δ?T₁} is unbounded in κ. Consequently, it is not possible to construct a model in which κ is indestructibly supercompact and B₁ = ??. On the other hand, assuming κ is supercompact and no cardinal δ > κ is inaccessible, we demonstrate that it is possible to construct a model in which κ is indestructibly supercompact and for every inaccessible cardinal δ < κ, V_δ?T₁. It is thus not possible to prove in ZFC that B_i = _df{δ < κ∣δ is an inaccessible limit of inaccessible cardinals and V_δ?T_i} for i = 2, …, 4 is unbounded in κ if κ is indestructibly supercompact. © 2011 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim     

Coding into HOD via normal measures with some applications

We develop a new method for coding sets while preserving GCH in the presence of large cardinals, particularly supercompact cardinals. We will use the number of normal measures carried by a measurable cardinal as an oracle, and therefore, in order to code a subset A of κ, we require that our model contain κ many measurable cardinals above κ. Additionally we will describe some of the applications of this result. © 2011 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim     

Failures of SCH and Level by Level Equivalence

We construct a model for the level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness in which below the least supercompact cardinal κ, there is a stationary set of cardinals on which SCH fails. In this model, the structure of the class of supercompact cardinals can be arbitrary.     

Level by level equivalence and strong compactness

We force and construct models in which there are non‐supercompact strongly compact cardinals which aren't measurable limits of strongly compact cardinals and in which level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness holds non‐trivially except at strongly compact cardinals. In these models, every measurable cardinal κ which isn't either strongly compact or a witness to a certain phenomenon first discovered by Menas is such that for every regular cardinal λ > κ, κ is λ strongly compact iff κ is λ supercompact. (© 2003 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Indestructibility, instances of strong compactness, and level by level inequivalence

Suppose λ > κ is measurable. We show that if κ is either indestructibly supercompact or indestructibly strong, then A = {δ < κ | δ is measurable, yet δ is neither δ ⁺ strongly compact nor a limit of measurable cardinals} must be unbounded in κ. The large cardinal hypothesis on λ is necessary, as we further demonstrate by constructing via forcing two models in which ${A = \emptyset}$ . The first of these contains a supercompact cardinal κ and is such that no cardinal δ > κ is measurable, κ’s supercompactness is indestructible under κ-directed closed, (κ ⁺, ∞)-distributive forcing, and every measurable cardinal δ < κ is δ ⁺ strongly compact. The second of these contains a strong cardinal κ and is such that no cardinal δ > κ is measurable, κ’s strongness is indestructible under < κ-strategically closed, (κ ⁺, ∞)-distributive forcing, and level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness holds. The model from the first of our forcing constructions is used to show that it is consistent, relative to a supercompact cardinal, for the least cardinal κ which is both strong and has its strongness indestructible under κ-directed closed, (κ ⁺, ∞)-distributive forcing to be the same as the least supercompact cardinal, which has its supercompactness indestructible under κ-directed closed, (κ ⁺, ∞)-distributive forcing. It further follows as a corollary of the first of our forcing constructions that it is possible to build a model containing a supercompact cardinal κ in which no cardinal δ > κ is measurable, κ is indestructibly supercompact, and every measurable cardinal δ < κ which is not a limit of measurable cardinals is δ ⁺ strongly compact.     

Tallness and level by level equivalence and inequivalence

We construct two models containing exactly one supercompact cardinal in which all non‐supercompact measurable cardinals are strictly taller than they are either strongly compact or supercompact. In the first of these models, level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness holds. In the other, level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness holds. Each universe has only one strongly compact cardinal and contains relatively few large cardinals (© 2010 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Characterizing strong compactness via strongness

We construct a model in which the strongly compact cardinals can be non‐trivially characterized via the statement “κ is strongly compact iff κ is a measurable limit of strong cardinals”. If our ground model contains large enough cardinals, there will be supercompact cardinals in the universe containing this characterization of the strongly compact cardinals.     

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 κ for 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 ${H^{V}_{\kappa^+} \subseteq {\rm HOD}^W}$ . 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 δ of <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.     

Indestructibility and stationary reflection

If κ < λ are such that κ is a strong cardinal whose strongness is indestructible under κ ‐strategically closed forcing and λ is weakly compact, then we show that A = {δ < κ | δ is a non‐weakly compact Mahlo cardinal which reflects stationary sets} must be unbounded in κ. This phenomenon, however, need not occur in a universe with relatively few large cardinals. In particular, we show how to construct a model where no cardinal is supercompact up to a Mahlo cardinal in which the least supercompact cardinal κ is also the least strongly compact cardinal, κ 's strongness is indestructible under κ ‐strategically closed forcing, κ 's supercompactness is indestructible under κ ‐directed closed forcing not adding any new subsets of κ, and δ is Mahlo and reflects stationary sets iff δ is weakly compact. In this model, no strong cardinal δ < κ is indestructible under δ ‐strategically closed forcing. It therefore follows that it is relatively consistent for the least strong cardinal κ whose strongness is indestructible under κ ‐strategically closed forcing to be the same as the least supercompact cardinal, which also has its supercompactness indestructible under κ ‐directed closed forcing not adding any new subsets of κ (© 2009 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Universal partial indestructibility and strong compactness

For any ordinal δ, let λ_δ be the least inaccessible cardinal above δ. We force and construct a model in which the least supercompact cardinal κ is indestructible under κ‐directed closed forcing and in which every measurable cardinal δ < κ is < λ_δ strongly compact and has its < λ_δ strong compactness indestructible under δ‐directed closed forcing of rank less than λ_δ. In this model, κ is also the least strongly compact cardinal. We also establish versions of this result in which κ is the least strongly compact cardinal but is not supercompact. (© 2005 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)     

Integer-valued functions and increasing unions of first countable spaces

We determine those regular cardinals κ with the property that for each increasing κ-chain of first countable spaces there is a compatible first countable topology on the union of the chain. AssumingV=L any such κ must be weakly compact. It is relatively consistent with a supercompact cardinal that each κ>w ₁ has the property. The proofs exploit the connection with interesting families of integer-valued functions. Research of the second author supported by OTKA grant no. 1805. Research of the remaining authors partially supported by NSERC of Canada.     

Indestructible strong compactness and level by level inequivalence

If are such that δ is indestructibly supercompact and γ is measurable, then it must be the case that level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness fails. We prove a theorem which points to this result being best possible. Specifically, we show that relative to the existence of cardinals such that κ₁ is λ‐supercompact and λ is inaccessible, there is a model for level by level inequivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness containing a supercompact cardinal in which κ’s strong compactness, but not supercompactness, is indestructible under κ‐directed closed forcing. In this model, κ is the least strongly compact cardinal, and no cardinal is supercompact up to an inaccessible cardinal.     

Diamond, square, and level by level equivalence

We force and construct a model in which level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness holds, along with certain additional combinatorial properties. In particular, in this model, holds for every regular uncountable cardinal , and below the least supercompact cardinal , holds on a stationary subset of . There are no restrictions in our model on the structure of the class of supercompact cardinals.The author wishes to thank the referee for numerous helpful comments and suggestions, which have considerably improved the presentation of the material contained herein. The author also wishes to thank Andreas Blass, the corresponding editor, for a useful suggestion, and Grigor Sargsyan for a very helpful conversation on the subject matter of this paper.Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 03E35, 03E55