Consistent and inconsistent generalizations of Martin’s Axiom, weak square and weak Chang’s Conjecture

Journal of Mathematical Logic (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We prove that the forcing axiom [Formula: see text] (stratified) implies [Formula: see text]. Using this implication, we show that the forcing axiom [Formula: see text] is inconsistent. We also derive weak Chang’s Conjecture from [Formula: see text] (stratified) and use this second implication to give another proof of the inconsistency of [Formula: see text].

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,010

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The equivalence of Axiom (∗)+ and Axiom (∗)++.W. Hugh Woodin - forthcoming - Journal of Mathematical Logic.
Compactness versus hugeness at successor cardinals.Sean Cox & Monroe Eskew - 2022 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 23 (1).
Specializing trees and answer to a question of Williams.Mohammad Golshani & Saharon Shelah - 2020 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 21 (1):2050023.
The grounded Martin's axiom.Miha E. Habič - 2017 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 63 (5):437-453.
Few new reals.David Asperó & Miguel Angel Mota - 2023 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 24 (2).
Mass problems and hyperarithmeticity.Joshua A. Cole & Stephen G. Simpson - 2007 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 7 (2):125-143.
Set mapping reflection.Justin Tatch Moore - 2005 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 5 (1):87-97.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-06-29

Downloads
12 (#1,369,278)

6 months
7 (#706,906)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Aspero
University of East Anglia

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references