Skip to main content
Log in

Indestructibility and the linearity of the Mitchell ordering

  • Published:
Archive for Mathematical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Suppose that \(\kappa \) is indestructibly supercompact and there is a measurable cardinal \(\lambda > \kappa \). It then follows that \(A_0 = \{\delta < \kappa \mid \delta \) is a measurable cardinal and the Mitchell ordering of normal measures over \(\delta \) is nonlinear\(\}\) is unbounded in \(\kappa \). If the Mitchell ordering of normal measures over \(\lambda \) is also linear, then by reflection (and without any use of indestructibility), \(A_1= \{\delta < \kappa \mid \delta \) is a measurable cardinal and the Mitchell ordering of normal measures over \(\delta \) is linear\(\}\) is unbounded in \(\kappa \) as well. The large cardinal hypothesis on \(\lambda \) is necessary. We demonstrate this by constructing via forcing two models in which \(\kappa \) is supercompact and \(\kappa \) exhibits an indestructibility property slightly weaker than full indestructibility but sufficient to infer that \(A_0\) is unbounded in \(\kappa \) if \(\lambda > \kappa \) is measurable. In one of these models, for every measurable cardinal \(\delta \), the Mitchell ordering of normal measures over \(\delta \) is linear. In the other of these models, for every measurable cardinal \(\delta \), the Mitchell ordering of normal measures over \(\delta \) is nonlinear.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

This manuscript has no associated data.

Notes

  1. The terminology “lottery sum” is due to Hamkins, although the concept of the lottery sum of partial orderings has been around for quite some time and has been referred to at different junctures via the names “disjoint sum of partial orderings,” “side-by-side forcing,” and “choosing which partial ordering to force with generically.”

  2. If \(\delta = \kappa \), then \({\dot{{{\mathbb {P}}}}}^\delta = {\dot{{{\mathbb {P}}}}}^\kappa \) is a term for trivial forcing.

  3. Note that what we refer to as \({<} \gamma \)-strategically closed, [10] refers to as \(\gamma \)-strategically closed.

References

  1. Apter, A.: Indestructibility and destructible measurable cardinals. Arch. Math. Logic 55, 3–18 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Apter, A.: Indestructibility and level by level equivalence and inequivalence. Math. Log. Q. 53, 78–85 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Apter, A.: Indestructibility and measurable cardinals with few and many measures. Arch. Math. Logic 47, 101–110 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Apter, A.: Indestructibility and stationary reflection. Math. Log. Q. 55, 228–236 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Apter, A.: Indestructibility, HOD, and the Ground Axiom. Math. Log. Q. 57, 261–265 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Apter, A.: Indestructibility, instances of strong compactness, and level by level inequivalence. Arch. Math. Logic 49, 725–741 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Apter, A.: Indestructibilty, measurability, and degrees of supercompactness. Math. Log. Q. 58, 75–82 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Apter, A.: Some remarks on normal measures and measurable cardinals. Math. Log. Q. 47, 35–44 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Apter, A., Hamkins, J.D.: Indestructibility and the level-by-level agreement between strong compactness and supercompactness. J. Symb. Log. 67, 820–840 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Gitik, M., Kaplan, E.: On restrictions of ultrafilters from generic extensions to ground models. J. Symb. Log. 88, 169–190 (2023)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Goldberg, G.: The linearity of the Mitchell order. J. Math. Logic 18, 1850005 (2018)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Hamkins, J.D.: Gap forcing. Israel J. Math. 125, 237–252 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Hamkins, J.D.: Gap forcing: generalizing the Lévy–Solovay theorem. Bull. Symb. Logic 5, 264–272 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hamkins, J.D.: The lottery preparation. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 101, 103–146 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Hamkins, J.D.: Small forcing makes any cardinal superdestructible. J. Symb. Log. 63, 51–58 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Jech, T.: Set Theory: The Third Millennium Edition, Revised and Expanded. Springer, Berlin (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Laver, R.: Making the supercompactness of \(\kappa \) indestructible under \(\kappa \)-directed closed forcing. Israel J. Math. 29, 385–388 (1978)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Lévy, A., Solovay, R.: Measurable cardinals and the continuum hypothesis. Israel J. Math. 5, 234–248 (1967)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Mitchell, W.: Sets constructible from sequences of ultrafilters. J. Symb. Log. 39, 57–66 (1974)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arthur W. Apter.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The author’s research was partially supported by PSC-CUNY Grant 63505-00-51. The author wishes to thank the referee for helpful comments and suggestions which have been incorporated into the current version of the paper. In particular, the author is grateful to the referee for having pointed out a key clarification and correction to the proof of Lemma 2.2.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Apter, A.W. Indestructibility and the linearity of the Mitchell ordering. Arch. Math. Logic 63, 473–482 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-024-00908-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00153-024-00908-7

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation