Let ƒ be a real number. It is well known [7] that the set of rational numbers which are less than ƒ is a recursive set if and only if ƒ is representable as the limit of a recursive, recursively convergent sequence of rational numbers. In this paper we replace the condition that the set of rational numbers less than ƒ is recursive by the condition that this set is at various points in the Kleene hierarchy, and we replace the recursive, recursively convergent limit by a variety of other recursive limiting processes.

In a previous article, the author introduced the idea of intrinsic density—a restriction of asymptotic density to sets whose density is invariant under computable permutation. We prove that sets with well-defined intrinsic density (and particularly intrinsic density 0) exist only in Turing degrees that are either high (${\bf{a}}\prime { \ge _{\rm{T}}}\emptyset \prime \prime$) or compute a diagonally noncomputable function. By contrast, a classic construction of an immune set in every noncomputable degree actually yields a set with intrinsic lower density 0 in every noncomputable degree.

We also show that the former result holds in the sense of reverse mathematics, in that (over RCA0) the existence of a dominating or diagonally noncomputable function is equivalent to the existence of a set with intrinsic density 0.

There are two main axiomatic extensions of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory without the axiom of choice, that associated with the axiom of determinateness, and that associated with infinite exponent partition relations. Initially, the axiom of determinateness, henceforth AD, was the sole tool available. Using it, set theorists in the late 1960s produced many remarkable results in pure set theory (e.g. the measurability of ℵ1) as well as in projective set theory (e.g. reduction principles for ). Infinite exponent partition relations were first studied successfully soon after these early consequences of AD. They too produced measurable cardinals and not only were the constructions here easier than those from AD—the results gave a far clearer picture of the measures involved than had been offered by AD. In general, the techniques offered by infinite exponent partition relations became so attractive that a great deal of the subsequent work from AD involved an initial derivation from AD of the appropriate infinite exponent partition relation and then the derivation from the partition relation of the desired result.

Since the early 1970s work on choiceless extensions of ZF + DC has split mainly between AD and its applications to projective set theory, and infinite exponent partition relations and their applications to pure set theory. There has certainly been a fair amount of interplay between the two, but for the most part the theories have been pursued independently.

Unlike AD, infinite exponent partition relations have shown themselves amenable to nontrivial forcing arguments. For example, Spector has constructed models for interesting partition relations, consequences of AD, in which AD is false. Thus AD is a strictly stronger assumption than are various infinite exponent partition relations. Furthermore, Woodin has recently proved the consistency of infinite exponent partition relations relative to assumptions consistent with the axiom of choice, in particular, relative to the existence of a supercompact cardinal. The notion of doing this for AD is not even considered.

The game is played on a complete Boolean algebra , by two players. White and Black, in κ-many moves (where κ is an infinite cardinal). At the beginning White chooses a non-zero element p ∈ . In the α-th move White chooses pα ∈ (0, p) and Black responds choosing iα ∈{0, 1}. White winsthe play iff . where and .

The corresponding game theoretic properties of c.B.a.'s are investigated. So, Black has a winning strategy (w.s.) if κ ≥ π() or if contains a κ-closed dense subset. On the other hand, if White has a w.s., then κ ∈ . The existence of w.s. is characterized in a combinatorial way and in terms of forcing. In particular, if 2<κ = κ ∈ Reg and forcing by preserves the regularity of κ, then White has a w.s. iff the power 2κ is collapsed to κ in some extension. It is shown that, under the GCH, for each set S ⊆ Reg there is a c.B.a. such that White (respectively. Black) has a w.s. for each infinite cardinal κ ∈ S (resp. κ ∉ S). Also it is shown consistent that for each κ ∈ Reg there is a c.B.a. on which the game is undetermined.

We present a forcing to obtain a localized version of Local Club Condensation, a generalized Condensation principle introduced by Sy Friedman and the first author in [3] and [5]. This forcing will have properties nicer than the forcings to obtain this localized version that could be derived from the forcings presented in either [3] or [5]. We also strongly simplify the related proofs provided in [3] and [5]. Moreover our forcing will be capable of introducing this localized principle at κ while simultaneously performing collapses to make κ become the successor of any given smaller regular cardinal. This will be particularly useful when κ has large cardinal properties in the ground model. We will apply this to measure how much L-likeness is implied by Local Club Condensation and related principles. We show that Local Club Condensation at κ+ is consistent with ¬☐κ whenever κ is regular and uncountable, generalizing and improving a result of the third author in [14], and that if κ ≥ ω2 is regular, CC(κ+) - Chang’s Conjecture at κ+ - is consistent with Local Club Condensation at κ+, both under suitable large cardinal consistency assumptions.

A fairly quotable special, but still representative, case of our main result is that for 2 ≤ n < ω, there is a natural number m(n) such that, the following holds. Assume GCH: If λ < μ are regular, there is a cofinality preserving forcing extension in which 2λ = μ and, for all σ < λ ≤ κ < η such that η(+m(n)−+) ≤ μ,

This generalizes results of [3], Section 1. and the forcing is a “many cardinals” version of the forcing there.

Forcing with [Κ]κ over a model of set theory with a strong partition cardinal, M. Spector produced a generic ultrafilter G on κ such that κκ/G is not well-founded.

Theorem. Let G be Spector-generic over a model M of , for all α < κ.

1) Every cardinal (well-ordered or not) of M is a cardinal of M[G].

2) If A ∈ M[G] is a well-ordered subset of M, then Ae M. Let Φ = Κκ/G.

3) There is an ultrafilter U on Φ such that every member of U has a subset of type Φ, and the intersection of any well-ordered subset of U is in U.

4) Φ satisfies for all α <ℵ1 and all ordinals β.

5) There is a linear order Φ′ with property 3) above which is not “weakly compact”, i.e., Φ′ ↛ (Φ′)2.

We prove the following theorem: If S is a consistent set of axioms for set theory, among whose consequences are the axioms of pairing and extensionality, and if S′ is the extension of S to all classes of sets of S, then S′ is consistent and remains so upon addition of an axiom expressing that the universal class has a well-ordering wherein every non-initial element has an immediate predecessor.

The basic idea will be use of the denumerable model of S guaranteed by the Skolem-Löwenheim theorem to obtain (i) a model of S′ in the domain of classes of natural numbers, and (ii) a correspondence between representatives (in the model of S′) of sets of S′ and natural numbers. One can then select a class of natural numbers in the model of S′ which will well-order (in the sense of the model of S′) the representatives of sets of S′ according to the numbers corresponding to them.

Specifically, let the formulas of S involve only one kind of variable and the sole predicate ‘ϵ’. The formulas of S′ can be thought of as identical with those of S; but the axioms of S′ will consist of (i) those of S with quantifiers restricted to sets by clauses ‘(∃z)[y ϵ z]’, (ii) those provided by the schema ‘(∃x) ▪ y ϵ x ≡y [(∃z)[y ϵ z] ▪ A]’, where ‘A’ is any formula of S′ in which ‘x is not free, and (iii) the axiom of extensionality.

There exists a family of sets of countable ordinals such that:

(1) max Bα = α,

(2) if α ∈ Bβ then Bα ⊆ Bβ,

(3) if λ ≤ α and λ is a limit ordinal then Bα ∩ λ is not in the ideal generated by the Bβ, β < α, and by the bounded subsets of λ,

(4) there is a partition of ω1 such that for every α and every n, Bα ∩ An is finite.

By taking a closer look at the construction of an Ackermann function we see that between any primitive recursive degree and its Ackermann modification there is a dense chain of primitive recursive degrees.

Subtle cardinals were first introduced in a paper by Jensen and Kunen [JK]. They show that if κ is subtle then ◇κ holds. Subtle cardinals also play an important role in [B1], where Baumgartner proposed that certain large cardinal properties should be considered as properties of their associated normal ideals. He shows that in the case of ineffables, the ideals are particularly useful, as can be seen by the following theorem, κ is ineffable if and only if κ is subtle and Π½-indescribable and the subtle and Π½-indescribable ideals cohere, i.e. they generate a proper, normal ideal (which in fact turns out to be the ineffable ideal).

In this paper we examine properties of subtle cardinals and consider methods of forcing that destroy the property of subtlety while maintaining other properties. The following is a list of results.

1) We relativize the following two facts about subtle cardinals:

i) if κ is n-subtle then {α < κ: α is not n-subtle} is n-subtle, and

ii) if κ is (n + 1)-subtle then {α < κ: α is n-subtle} is in the (n + 1)-subtle filter to subsets of κ:

i′) if A is an n-subtle subset of κ then {α ϵ A: A ∩ α is not n-subtle} is n-subtle, and

ii′) if A is an (n + 1)-subtle subset of κ then {α ϵ A: A ∩ α is n-subtle} is (n + 1)-subtle.

2) We show that although a stationary limit of subtles is subtle, a subtle limit of subtles is not necessarily 2-subtle.

3) In §3 we use the technique of forcing to turn a subtle cardinal into a κ-Mahlo cardinal that is no longer subtle.

4) In §4 we extend the results of §3 by showing how to turn an (n + 1)-subtle cardinal into an n-subtle cardinal that is no longer (n + 1)-subtle.