MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let P be the statement: Every ccc partial order has $\omega_1$-precaliber; i.e., every uncountable subset $X$ of a ccc partial order $P$ has an uncountable subset $Y$ such that for every finite subset $F$ of $Y$, there is a member in $P$ below every member of $F$.

Let Q be the statement: Product of ccc partial orders is ccc.

It is known that $MA(\omega_1)$ (Martin's axiom at $\omega_1$) implies $P$ and that $P$ implies $Q$. Do these implications reverse?

share|cite|improve this question

In a recent article of Teruyuki Yorioka it is stated that it is open whether Q implies $\text{MA}_{\aleph_1}$. The reference is [A non-implication between fragments of Martin’s Axiom related to a property which comes from Aronszajn trees, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic. 161(4), p. 469-487]. I don't think the other implications are known either.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.