Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm trying to learn about forcing, and have heard that there are several equivalent ways to define genericity. For instance, let M be a transitive model of ZFC containing a poset (P, ≤). Suppose G ⊆ P is such that q ∈ G whenever both p ∈ G and q ≥ p. Suppose also that whenever p,q ∈ G then there is r ∈ G such that r ≤ p and r ≤ q. Then the following are equivalent ways to say that G is generic:

(1) G meets every element of M dense in P. That is, for all D ∈ M, if for all p ∈ P there is q ∈ D such that q ≤ p, then G ∩ D is nonempty.

(2) G is nonempty and meets every element of M dense below some p ∈ G. That is, for all p ∈ G and all B ∈ M, if for each q ≤ p there is r ∈ B such that r ≤ q, then G ∩ B is nonempty.

Proving this equivalence seemed like it would be an easy exercise, but I think I'm missing something. Can someone point me toward a source where I can find a proof? I hope this is an acceptable question; this is my first time posting.

EDIT: Typo and omission fixed.

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

If $G$ satisfies (1), then it satisfies (2) because if $p$ is in $G$ and $D$ is dense below $p$, then let $D'$ be the set of conditions $q$ which are either in $D$ or incompatible with $p$. This is dense in $P$ since any condition that is compatible with $p$ will have elements of $D$ below it, and any condition incompatible with $p$ is already in $D'$. But $G$ cannot meet $D'$ in something incompatible with $p$, by your assumption on $G$, and so it must meet it in $D$, as desired.

Conversely, if $G$ satisfies (2), then it will satisfy (1) because if $D$ is dense, then it is dense below any $p$, and so $G$ will meet it.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks. D' was exactly what I was missing. Now I see the general strategy for proving such equivalences. –  user8546 Aug 17 '10 at 2:18
    
Great! There are several other equivalent characterizations of $M$-genericity: (3) $G$ meets every maximal antichain in $M$; (4) $G$ meets every pre-dense set in $M$; and provided $P$ is a complete Boolean algebra, (5) $G$ is $M$-complete, in the sense that if $M$ has a descending sequence in $G$, then it has a lower bound in $G$. –  Joel David Hamkins Aug 17 '10 at 2:31
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.