Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:33:14.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Higher Souslin trees and the generalized continuum hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

John Gregory*
Affiliation:
Suny at Buffalo, Amherst, New York 14226

Extract

The existence of an ω2-Souslin tree will be proved (Theorem 2.2 or §3) from the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis (GCH) plus Jensen's combinatorial principle □ω1. Thus, it follows from Jensen's 1.4(2) that the consistency of the formal theory T given by ZFC + GCH + “ω2-Souslin Hypothesis” implies the consistency of ZFC + “there exists a Mahlo cardinal.” So one does not hope to prove the consistency of this T relative to the consistency of ZFC + “there is an inaccessible cardinal, hence there are transitive models of ZFC.”

Silver [5, Theorem 5.8] has shown that the consistency of ZFC + “there is a weakly compact cardinal” implies the consistency of ZFC + not GCH + “there is no ω2-Aronszajn tree, hence no ω2-Souslin tree”; this is one reason why we deal with GCH here. Jensen has shown that the consistency of ZFC implies the consistency of ZFC +GCH + “ω1-Souslin Hypothesis.”

In the preliminary §1, we state some definitions and known results about trees and some of Jensen's combinatorial principles, including □ and ◇*(E).

Our main Lemma 2.1 states (a fortiori) that GCH implies ◇* at ω-cofinal elements of ω2 (i.e., in our notation, ◇*(E(ω) ∩ ω2)). From Lemma 2.1 and the known facts of §1, it is proved (2.5) that if □ k , the cofinality cf(k)> ω, and GCH, then there is a k +-Souslin tree. For k = ω1, this implies the result mentioned above for ω2-Souslin trees.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1976

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.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] Jech, Thomas J., Lectures in set theory, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 217, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1971, 137 pp.Google Scholar
[2] Jech, Thomas J., Trees, this Journal, vol. 36 (1971), pp. 114.Google Scholar
[3] Jensen, R. Björn, The fine structure of the constructive hierarchy, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 4 (1972), pp. 229308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Jensen, R. B. and Kunen, K., Some combinatorial properties of L and V, mimeograph.Google Scholar
[5] Mitchell, William, Aronszajn trees and the independence of the transfer property, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 5 (1972), pp. 2146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6] Sikorski, Roman, Boolean algebras, 2nd ed., Academic Press, New York, 1964.Google Scholar