- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
A universal indestructibility theorem compatible with level by level equivalence
Archive for Mathematical Logic 54 (3-4):463-470 (2015)
Abstract
We prove an indestructibility theorem for degrees of supercompactness that is compatible with level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness.Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Supercompactness and level by level equivalence are compatible with indestructibility for strong compactness.Arthur W. Apter - 2007 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 46 (3-4):155-163.
Indestructibility under adding Cohen subsets and level by level equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2009 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 55 (3):271-279.
Universal indestructibility for degrees of supercompactness and strongly compact cardinals.Arthur W. Apter & Grigor Sargsyan - 2008 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 47 (2):133-142.
Supercompactness and measurable limits of strong cardinals II: Applications to level by level equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 52 (5):457-463.
An Easton theorem for level by level equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2005 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (3):247-253.
Indestructibility and level by level equivalence and inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2007 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 53 (1):78-85.
Failures of SCH and Level by Level Equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 45 (7):831-838.
Indestructible strong compactness and level by level inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2013 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 59 (4-5):371-377.
Indestructibility and the level-by-level agreement between strong compactness and supercompactness.Arthur W. Apter & Joel David Hamkins - 2002 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (2):820-840.
Tallness and level by level equivalence and inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2010 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 56 (1):4-12.
Analytics
Added to PP
2015-03-22
Downloads
15 (#1,233,030)
6 months
5 (#1,039,842)
2015-03-22
Downloads
15 (#1,233,030)
6 months
5 (#1,039,842)
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
On strong compactness and supercompactness.Telis K. Menas - 1975 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 7 (4):327-359.
The lottery preparation.Joel David Hamkins - 2000 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 101 (2-3):103-146.
Gap forcing: Generalizing the lévy-Solovay theorem.Joel David Hamkins - 1999 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):264-272.
Indestructibility and the level-by-level agreement between strong compactness and supercompactness.Arthur W. Apter & Joel David Hamkins - 2002 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (2):820-840.
Small forcing makes any cardinal superdestructible.Joel Hamkins - 1998 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (1):51-58.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-667477cd97-lxkd2 dc2