MathOverflow will be down for maintenance for approximately 3 hours, starting Monday evening (06/24/2013) at approximately 9:00 PM Eastern time (UTC-4).

2 small correction: filters on $\omega$

It is known that if a forcing notion is proper, then every P-filter will generate a P-filter in the generic extension (see, e.g., Shelah, Proper and Improper Forcing, VI.5)

On the other hand, if we start collapsing cardinals, we can destroy the P-filter property. For example, making a base of a P-point countable will add a sequence of elements from the filter (namely, a complete enumeration of that base) that serves as a counterexample for the P-filter property in the extension.

So my question is:

Are there examples of "nicer" (e.g., not collapsing cardinals) forcing notions that destroy P-filters in this way, i.e., add a sequence in the filter that the filter cannot decide?

More spectacularly, is there maybe a forcing notion that could preserve a P-point as an ultrafilter while destroying the P-filter property?

EDIT: As Martin Goldstern pointed out, I should add that I'm interested in filters on $\omega$.

1

# Destroying the P-filter-property

It is known that if a forcing notion is proper, then every P-filter will generate a P-filter in the generic extension (see, e.g., Shelah, Proper and Improper Forcing, VI.5)

On the other hand, if we start collapsing cardinals, we can destroy the P-filter property. For example, making a base of a P-point countable will add a sequence of elements from the filter (namely, a complete enumeration of that base) that serves as a counterexample for the P-filter property in the extension.

So my question is:

Are there examples of "nicer" (e.g., not collapsing cardinals) forcing notions that destroy P-filters in this way, i.e., add a sequence in the filter that the filter cannot decide?

More spectacularly, is there maybe a forcing notion that could preserve a P-point as an ultrafilter while destroying the P-filter property?