Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T16:10:49.751Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Borel sets and Ramsey's theorem1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Fred Galvin
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024
Karel Prikry
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706

Extract

Definition 1. For a set S and a cardinal κ,

In particular, 2ω denotes the power set of the natural numbers and not the cardinal 2ℵ0. We regard 2ω as a topological space with the usual product topology.

Definition 2. A set S ⊆ 2ω is Ramsey if there is an M ∈ [ω]ω such that either [M]ωS or else [M]ω ⊆ 2ωS.

Erdös and Rado [3, Example 1, p. 434] showed that not every S ⊆ 2ω is Ramsey. In view of the nonconstructive character of the counterexample, one might expect (as Dana Scott has suggested) that all sufficiently definable sets are Ramsey. In fact, our main result (Theorem 2) is that all Borei sets are Ramsey. Soare [10] has applied this result to some problems in recursion theory.

The first positive result on Scott's problem was Ramsey's theorem [8, Theorem A]. The next advance was Nash-Williams' generalization of Ramsey's theorem (Corollary 2), which can be interpreted as saying: If S1 and S2 are disjoint open subsets of 2ω, there is an M ∈ [ω]ω such that either [M]ωS1 = ∅ or [M]ωS2 = ⊆. (This is halfway between “clopen sets are Ramsey” and “open sets are Ramsey.”) Then Galvin [4] stated a generalization of Nash-Williams' theorem (Corollary 1) which says, in effect, that open sets are Ramsey; this was discovered independently by Andrzej Ehrenfeucht, Paul Cohen, and probably many others, but no proof has been published.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

The research for this paper was supported by NSF grant GP-27964 and 144-A966.

References

REFERENCES

[1]Chang, C. C. and Galvin, Fred, A combinatorial theorem with applications to polarized partition relations (to appear).Google Scholar
[2]Erdös, P. and Hajnal, A., Unsolved problems in set theory, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, Vol. 13, Part 1, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1971, pp. 1748.Google Scholar
[3]Erdös, P. and Rado, R., Combinatorial theorems on classifications of subsets of a given set, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (3), vol. 2 (1952), pp. 417439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Galvin, Fred, A generalization of Ramsey's theorem, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 15 (1968), p. 548. Abstract 68T–368.Google Scholar
[5]Martin, D. A. and Solovay, R. M., Internal Cohen extensions, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 2 (1970), pp. 143178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Mathias, A. R. D., On a generalization of Ramsey's theorem, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 15 (1968), p. 931. Abstract 68T–E19.Google Scholar
[7]Nash-Williams, C. St. J. A.. On well-quasi-ordering transfinite sequences, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 61 (1965), pp. 3339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Ramsey, F. P., On a problem of formal logic, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (2), vol. 30 (1930), pp. 264286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Silver, Jack, Every analytic set is Ramsey, this Journal, vol. 35 (1970), pp. 6064.Google Scholar
[10]Soare, Robert I., Sets with no subset of higher degree, this Journal, vol. 34 (1969), pp. 5356.Google Scholar
[11]Solovay, Robert M., A model of set-theory in which every set of reals is Lebesgue measurable, Annals of Mathematics (2), vol. 92 (1970), pp. 156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar