Indescribable cardinal: Difference between revisions
imported>C7XWiki No edit summary |
imported>C7XWiki Consistent notation →Equivalent conditions |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| page=295}}</ref> The idea is that <math>\kappa</math> cannot be distinguished (looking from below) from smaller cardinals by any formula of n+1-th order logic with m-1 alternations of quantifiers even with the advantage of an extra unary predicate symbol (for A). This implies that it is large because it means that there must be many smaller cardinals with similar properties. {{citation needed|date=June 2023}} | | page=295}}</ref> The idea is that <math>\kappa</math> cannot be distinguished (looking from below) from smaller cardinals by any formula of n+1-th order logic with m-1 alternations of quantifiers even with the advantage of an extra unary predicate symbol (for A). This implies that it is large because it means that there must be many smaller cardinals with similar properties. {{citation needed|date=June 2023}} | ||
The cardinal number <math>\kappa</math> is called '''totally indescribable''' if it is <math>\Pi^n_m</math>-indescribable for all positive integers ''m'' and ''n''. | The cardinal number <math>\kappa</math> is called '''totally indescribable''' if it is <math>\Pi^n_m</math>-indescribable for all positive integers ''m'' and ''n''.<ref name="TheHigherInfinite">[[Akihiro Kanamori|A. Kanamori]], ''The Higher Infinite: Large Cardinals in Set Theory from Their Beginnings (Second Edition)'' (2009). Springer Monographs in Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-88867-3.</ref><sup>p. 59</sup> | ||
If <math>\alpha</math> is an ordinal, the cardinal number <math>\kappa</math> is called '''<math>\alpha</math>-indescribable''' if for every formula <math>\phi</math> and every subset <math>U</math> of <math>V_\kappa</math> such that <math>\phi(U)</math> holds in <math>V_{\kappa+\alpha}</math> there is a some <math>\lambda<\kappa</math> such that <math>\phi(U\cap V_\lambda)</math> holds in <math>V_{\lambda+\alpha}</math>. If <math>\alpha</math> is infinite then <math>\alpha</math>-indescribable ordinals are totally indescribable, and if <math>\alpha</math> is finite they are the same as <math>\Pi^\alpha_\omega</math>-indescribable ordinals. There is no <math>\kappa</math> that is <math>\kappa</math>-indescribable, nor does <math>\alpha</math>-indescribability necessarily imply <math>\beta</math>-indescribability for any <math>\beta<\alpha</math>, but there is an alternative notion of [[shrewd cardinal]]s that makes sense when <math>\alpha\geq\kappa</math>: if <math>\phi(U,\kappa)</math> holds in <math>V_{\kappa+\alpha}</math>, then there are <math>\lambda<\kappa</math> and <math>\beta</math> such that <math>\phi(U\cap V_\lambda,\lambda)</math> holds in <math>V_{\lambda+\beta}</math>.<ref>M. Rathjen, "[https://web.archive.org/web/20240114000507/https://www1.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~rathjen/HIGH.pdf The Higher Infinite in Proof Theory]" (1995), p.20. Archived 14 January 2024.</ref> However, it is possible that a cardinal <math>\pi</math> is <math>\kappa</math>-indescribable for <math>\kappa</math> much greater than <math>\pi</math>.<ref name="Drake74" /><sup>Ch. 9, theorem 4.3</sup> | If <math>\alpha</math> is an ordinal, the cardinal number <math>\kappa</math> is called '''<math>\alpha</math>-indescribable''' if for every formula <math>\phi</math> and every subset <math>U</math> of <math>V_\kappa</math> such that <math>\phi(U)</math> holds in <math>V_{\kappa+\alpha}</math> there is a some <math>\lambda<\kappa</math> such that <math>\phi(U\cap V_\lambda)</math> holds in <math>V_{\lambda+\alpha}</math>. If <math>\alpha</math> is infinite then <math>\alpha</math>-indescribable ordinals are totally indescribable, and if <math>\alpha</math> is finite they are the same as <math>\Pi^\alpha_\omega</math>-indescribable ordinals. There is no <math>\kappa</math> that is <math>\kappa</math>-indescribable, nor does <math>\alpha</math>-indescribability necessarily imply <math>\beta</math>-indescribability for any <math>\beta<\alpha</math>, but there is an alternative notion of [[shrewd cardinal]]s that makes sense when <math>\alpha\geq\kappa</math>: if <math>\phi(U,\kappa)</math> holds in <math>V_{\kappa+\alpha}</math>, then there are <math>\lambda<\kappa</math> and <math>\beta</math> such that <math>\phi(U\cap V_\lambda,\lambda)</math> holds in <math>V_{\lambda+\beta}</math>.<ref>M. Rathjen, "[https://web.archive.org/web/20240114000507/https://www1.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~rathjen/HIGH.pdf The Higher Infinite in Proof Theory]" (1995), p.20. Archived 14 January 2024.</ref> However, it is possible that a cardinal <math>\pi</math> is <math>\kappa</math>-indescribable for <math>\kappa</math> much greater than <math>\pi</math>.<ref name="Drake74" /><sup>Ch. 9, theorem 4.3</sup> | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
==Historical note== | ==Historical note== | ||
Originally, a cardinal κ was called Q-indescribable if for every Q-formula <math>\phi</math> and relation <math>A</math>, if <math>(\kappa,<,A)\vDash\phi</math> then there exists an <math>\alpha<\kappa</math> such that <math>(\alpha,\in,A\upharpoonright\alpha)\vDash\phi</math>.<ref>K. Kunen, "Indescribability and the Continuum" (1971). Appearing in ''Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1'', pp.199--203</ref><ref name="Levy71">Azriel Lévy, "The Sizes of the Indescribable Cardinals" (1971). Appearing in ''Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1'', pp.205--218</ref> Using this definition, <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_0</math>-indescribable iff <math>\kappa</math> is regular and greater than <math>\aleph_0</math>.<ref name="Levy71" /><sup>p.207</sup> The cardinals <math>\kappa</math> satisfying the above version based on the cumulative hierarchy were called strongly Q-indescribable.<ref>{{cite journal | Originally, a cardinal κ was called Q-indescribable if for every Q-formula <math>\phi</math> and relation <math>A</math>, if <math>(\kappa,<,A)\vDash\phi</math> then there exists an <math>\alpha<\kappa</math> such that <math>(\alpha,\in,A\upharpoonright\alpha)\vDash\phi</math>.<ref>{{harvtxt|Hanf|Scott|1961}}</ref><ref>K. Kunen, "Indescribability and the Continuum" (1971). Appearing in ''Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1'', pp.199--203</ref><ref name="Levy71">Azriel Lévy, "The Sizes of the Indescribable Cardinals" (1971). Appearing in ''Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1'', pp.205--218</ref> Using this definition, <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_0</math>-indescribable iff <math>\kappa</math> is regular and greater than <math>\aleph_0</math>.<ref name="Levy71" /><sup>p.207</sup> The cardinals <math>\kappa</math> satisfying the above version based on the cumulative hierarchy were called strongly Q-indescribable.<ref>{{cite journal | ||
| last1=Richter | first1=Wayne | | last1=Richter | first1=Wayne | ||
| last2=Aczel | first2=Peter | | last2=Aczel | first2=Peter | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
==Equivalent conditions== | ==Equivalent conditions== | ||
A cardinal is <math>\Sigma^1_{n+1}</math>-indescribable iff it is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable.<ref name="Hauser91">{{cite journal | A cardinal is <math>\Sigma^1_{n+1}</math>-indescribable iff it is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable.<ref name="TheHigherInfinite" /><sup>p. 59</sup><ref name="Hauser91">{{cite journal | ||
| last1=Hauser | first1=Kai | | last1=Hauser | first1=Kai | ||
| title=Indescribable Cardinals and Elementary Embeddings | | title=Indescribable Cardinals and Elementary Embeddings | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| doi=10.2307/2274692}}</ref> A cardinal is [[Inaccessible cardinal|inaccessible]] if and only if it is <math>\Pi^0_n</math>-indescribable for all positive integers <math>n</math>, equivalently iff it is <math>\Pi^0_2</math>-indescribable, equivalently if it is <math>\Sigma^1_1</math>-indescribable. | | doi=10.2307/2274692}}</ref> A cardinal is [[Inaccessible cardinal|inaccessible]] if and only if it is <math>\Pi^0_n</math>-indescribable for all positive integers <math>n</math>, equivalently iff it is <math>\Pi^0_2</math>-indescribable, equivalently if it is <math>\Sigma^1_1</math>-indescribable. | ||
<math>\Pi^1_1</math>-indescribable cardinals are the same as [[weakly compact cardinal]]s.<ref name=" | <math>\Pi^1_1</math>-indescribable cardinals are the same as [[weakly compact cardinal]]s.<ref name="TheHigherInfinite" /><sup>p. 59</sup> | ||
The indescribability condition is equivalent to <math>V_\kappa</math> satisfying the [[reflection principle]] (which is provable in ZFC), but extended by allowing higher-order formulae with a second-order free variable.<ref name="Hauser91"/> | The indescribability condition is equivalent to <math>V_\kappa</math> satisfying the [[reflection principle]] (which is provable in ZFC), but extended by allowing higher-order formulae with a second-order free variable.<ref name="Hauser91"/> | ||
For cardinals <math>\kappa<\theta</math>, say that an elementary embedding <math>j:M\to H(\theta)</math> a ''small embedding'' if <math>M</math> is transitive and <math>j(\textrm{crit}(j))=\kappa</math>. For any natural number <math>1\leq n</math>, <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable iff there is an <math>\alpha>\kappa</math> such that for all <math>\theta>\alpha</math> there is a small embedding <math>j:M\to H_\theta</math> such that <math>H(\textrm{crit}(j)^+)^M\prec_{\Sigma_n}H(\textrm{crit}(j)^+)</math>.<ref>{{cite journal | For cardinals <math>\kappa<\theta</math>, say that an elementary embedding <math>j:M\to H(\theta)</math> a ''small embedding'' if <math>M</math> is transitive, <math>M</math> is in <math>H(\theta)</math>, and <math>j(\textrm{crit}(j))=\kappa</math>. For any natural number <math>1\leq n</math>, <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable iff there is an <math>\alpha>\kappa</math> such that for all <math>\theta>\alpha</math> there is a small embedding <math>j:M\to H_\theta</math> such that <math>H(\textrm{crit}(j)^+)^M\prec_{\Sigma_n}H(\textrm{crit}(j)^+)</math>.<ref>{{cite journal | ||
| last1=Holy | first1=Peter | | last1=Holy | first1=Peter | ||
| last2=Lücke | first2=Philipp | | last2=Lücke | first2=Philipp | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
The property of <math>\kappa</math> being <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Pi^1_{n+1}</math> over <math>V_\kappa</math>, i.e. there is a <math>\Pi^1_{n+1}</math> sentence that <math>V_\kappa</math> satisfies iff <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable.<ref name="Kanamori03">{{cite book|last=Kanamori|first=Akihiro|author-link=Akihiro Kanamori|year=2003|publisher=Springer|title=The Higher Infinite : Large Cardinals in Set Theory from Their Beginnings|title-link=The Higher Infinite|edition=2nd|isbn=3-540-00384-3|doi=10.1007/978-3-540-88867-3_2|page=64}}</ref> For <math>m>1</math>, the property of being <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Sigma^m_n</math> and the property of being <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Pi^m_n</math>.<ref name="Kanamori03" /> Thus, for <math>m>1</math>, every cardinal that is either <math>\Pi^m_{n+1}</math>-indescribable or <math>\Sigma^m_{n+1}</math>-indescribable is both <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable and <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable and the set of such cardinals below it is stationary. The consistency strength of <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinals is below that of <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable, but for <math>m>1</math> it is consistent with ZFC that the least <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable exists and is above the least <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal (this is proved from consistency of ZFC with <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal and a <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal above it).{{cn|date=June 2024}} | The property of <math>\kappa</math> being <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Pi^1_{n+1}</math> over <math>V_\kappa</math>, i.e. there is a <math>\Pi^1_{n+1}</math> sentence that <math>V_\kappa</math> satisfies iff <math>\kappa</math> is <math>\Pi^1_n</math>-indescribable.<ref name="Kanamori03">{{cite book|last=Kanamori|first=Akihiro|author-link=Akihiro Kanamori|year=2003|publisher=Springer|title=The Higher Infinite : Large Cardinals in Set Theory from Their Beginnings|title-link=The Higher Infinite|edition=2nd|isbn=3-540-00384-3|doi=10.1007/978-3-540-88867-3_2|page=64}}</ref> For <math>m>1</math>, the property of being <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Sigma^m_n</math> and the property of being <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable is <math>\Pi^m_n</math>.<ref name="Kanamori03" /> Thus, for <math>m>1</math>, every cardinal that is either <math>\Pi^m_{n+1}</math>-indescribable or <math>\Sigma^m_{n+1}</math>-indescribable is both <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable and <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable and the set of such cardinals below it is stationary. The consistency strength of <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinals is below that of <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable, but for <math>m>1</math> it is consistent with ZFC that the least <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable exists and is above the least <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal (this is proved from consistency of ZFC with <math>\Pi^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal and a <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribable cardinal above it).{{cn|date=June 2024}} | ||
Totally indescribable cardinals remain totally indescribable in the [[constructible universe]] and in other canonical inner models, and similarly for <math>\Pi^m_n</math>- and <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribability. | Totally indescribable cardinals remain totally indescribable in the [[constructible universe]]<ref name="TheHigherInfinite" /><sup>p. 62--63</sup> and in other canonical inner models, and similarly for <math>\Pi^m_n</math>- and <math>\Sigma^m_n</math>-indescribability. | ||
For natural number <math>n</math>, if a cardinal <math>\kappa</math> is <math>n</math>-indescribable, there is an ordinal <math>\alpha<\kappa</math> such that <math>(V_{\alpha+n},\in)\equiv(V_{\kappa+n},\in)</math>, where <math>\equiv</math> denotes [[elementary equivalence]].<ref>W. N. Reinhardt, "[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0003484370900112 Ackermann's set theory equals ZF]", pp.234--235. Annals of Mathematical Logic vol. 2, iss. 2 (1970).</ref> For <math>n=0</math> this is a biconditional (see [[Inaccessible_cardinal#Two_model-theoretic_characterisations_of_inaccessibility|Two model-theoretic characterisations of inaccessibility]]). | For natural number <math>n</math>, if a cardinal <math>\kappa</math> is <math>n</math>-indescribable, there is an ordinal <math>\alpha<\kappa</math> such that <math>(V_{\alpha+n},\in)\equiv(V_{\kappa+n},\in)</math>, where <math>\equiv</math> denotes [[elementary equivalence]].<ref>W. N. Reinhardt, "[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0003484370900112 Ackermann's set theory equals ZF]", pp.234--235. Annals of Mathematical Logic vol. 2, iss. 2 (1970).</ref> For <math>n=0</math> this is a biconditional (see [[Inaccessible_cardinal#Two_model-theoretic_characterisations_of_inaccessibility|Two model-theoretic characterisations of inaccessibility]]). | ||
Latest revision as of 21:25, 1 November 2025
Script error: No such module "Unsubst".
In set theory, a branch of mathematics, a Q-indescribable cardinal is a certain kind of large cardinal number that is hard to axiomatize in some language Q. There are many different types of indescribable cardinals corresponding to different choices of languages Q. They were introduced by Script error: No such module "Footnotes"..
A cardinal number is called -indescribable if for every proposition , and set with there exists an with .[1] Following Lévy's hierarchy, here one looks at formulas with m-1 alternations of quantifiers with the outermost quantifier being universal. -indescribable cardinals are defined in a similar way, but with an outermost existential quantifier. Prior to defining the structure , one new predicate symbol is added to the language of set theory, which is interpreted as .[2] The idea is that cannot be distinguished (looking from below) from smaller cardinals by any formula of n+1-th order logic with m-1 alternations of quantifiers even with the advantage of an extra unary predicate symbol (for A). This implies that it is large because it means that there must be many smaller cardinals with similar properties. Script error: No such module "Unsubst".
The cardinal number is called totally indescribable if it is -indescribable for all positive integers m and n.[3]p. 59
If is an ordinal, the cardinal number is called -indescribable if for every formula and every subset of such that holds in there is a some such that holds in . If is infinite then -indescribable ordinals are totally indescribable, and if is finite they are the same as -indescribable ordinals. There is no that is -indescribable, nor does -indescribability necessarily imply -indescribability for any , but there is an alternative notion of shrewd cardinals that makes sense when : if holds in , then there are and such that holds in .[4] However, it is possible that a cardinal is -indescribable for much greater than .[1]Ch. 9, theorem 4.3
Historical note
Originally, a cardinal κ was called Q-indescribable if for every Q-formula and relation , if then there exists an such that .[5][6][7] Using this definition, is -indescribable iff is regular and greater than .[7]p.207 The cardinals satisfying the above version based on the cumulative hierarchy were called strongly Q-indescribable.[8] This property has also been referred to as "ordinal -indescribability".[9]p.32
Equivalent conditions
A cardinal is -indescribable iff it is -indescribable.[3]p. 59[10] A cardinal is inaccessible if and only if it is -indescribable for all positive integers , equivalently iff it is -indescribable, equivalently if it is -indescribable.
-indescribable cardinals are the same as weakly compact cardinals.[3]p. 59
The indescribability condition is equivalent to satisfying the reflection principle (which is provable in ZFC), but extended by allowing higher-order formulae with a second-order free variable.[10]
For cardinals , say that an elementary embedding a small embedding if is transitive, is in , and . For any natural number , is -indescribable iff there is an such that for all there is a small embedding such that .[11], Corollary 4.3
If V=L, then for a natural number n>0, an uncountable cardinal is ΠScript error: No such module "Su".-indescribable iff it's (n+1)-stationary.[12]
Enforceable classes
For a class of ordinals and a -indescribable cardinal , is said to be enforced at (by some formula of ) if there is a -formula and an such that , but for no with does hold.[1]p.277 This gives a tool to show necessary properties of indescribable cardinals.
Properties
The property of being -indescribable is over , i.e. there is a sentence that satisfies iff is -indescribable.[13] For , the property of being -indescribable is and the property of being -indescribable is .[13] Thus, for , every cardinal that is either -indescribable or -indescribable is both -indescribable and -indescribable and the set of such cardinals below it is stationary. The consistency strength of -indescribable cardinals is below that of -indescribable, but for it is consistent with ZFC that the least -indescribable exists and is above the least -indescribable cardinal (this is proved from consistency of ZFC with -indescribable cardinal and a -indescribable cardinal above it).Script error: No such module "Unsubst".
Totally indescribable cardinals remain totally indescribable in the constructible universe[3]p. 62--63 and in other canonical inner models, and similarly for - and -indescribability.
For natural number , if a cardinal is -indescribable, there is an ordinal such that , where denotes elementary equivalence.[14] For this is a biconditional (see Two model-theoretic characterisations of inaccessibility).
Measurable cardinals are -indescribable, but the smallest measurable cardinal is not -indescribable.[13]p. 61 However, assuming choice, there are many totally indescribable cardinals below any measurable cardinal.
For , ZFC+"there is a -indescribable cardinal" is equiconsistent with ZFC+"there is a -indescribable cardinal such that ", i.e. "GCH fails at a -indescribable cardinal".[10]
References
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
Citations
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c d A. Kanamori, The Higher Infinite: Large Cardinals in Set Theory from Their Beginnings (Second Edition) (2009). Springer Monographs in Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-540-88867-3.
- ↑ M. Rathjen, "The Higher Infinite in Proof Theory" (1995), p.20. Archived 14 January 2024.
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Footnotes".
- ↑ K. Kunen, "Indescribability and the Continuum" (1971). Appearing in Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1, pp.199--203
- ↑ a b Azriel Lévy, "The Sizes of the Indescribable Cardinals" (1971). Appearing in Axiomatic Set Theory: Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, vol. 13 part 1, pp.205--218
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ W. Boos, "Lectures on large cardinal axioms". In Logic Conference, Kiel 1974. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 499 (1975).
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ W. N. Reinhardt, "Ackermann's set theory equals ZF", pp.234--235. Annals of Mathematical Logic vol. 2, iss. 2 (1970).
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".