On the Hamkins approximation property

DOI10.1016/j.apal.2006.05.005zbMath1110.03042OpenAlexW1988481910MaRDI QIDQ861823

William J. Mitchell

Publication date: 2 February 2007

Published in: Annals of Pure and Applied Logic (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apal.2006.05.005

zbMATH Keywords

forcingapproximation propertygap forcing

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Consistency and independence results (03E35) Other aspects of forcing and Boolean-valued models (03E40)

Related Items

Borel reductions and cub games in generalised descriptive set theory ⋮ SPECIALISING TREES WITH SMALL APPROXIMATIONS I ⋮ The downward directed grounds hypothesis and very large cardinals ⋮ Strong tree properties, Kurepa trees, and guessing models ⋮ A general Mitchell style iteration ⋮ Strongly proper forcing and some problems of Foreman ⋮ Fragility and indestructibility. II ⋮ NAMBA FORCING, WEAK APPROXIMATION, AND GUESSING ⋮ Characterizing large cardinals in terms of layered posets ⋮ Strong tree properties for small cardinals ⋮ 𝐼[𝜔₂ can be the nonstationary ideal on 𝐶𝑜𝑓(𝜔₁)] ⋮ Superstrong and other large cardinals are never Laver indestructible ⋮ Set-theoretic geology ⋮ QUOTIENTS OF STRONGLY PROPER FORCINGS AND GUESSING MODELS

Cites Work

• Extensions with the approximation and cover properties have no new large cardinals
• A weak variation of shelah's I[ω₂]
• Aronszajn trees and the independence of the transfer property
• Gap forcing