Skip to main content
Post Undeleted by François G. Dorais
Post Deleted by Mohammad Golshani
Notice removed Canonical answer required by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with no winning answer by CommunityBot
Notice added Canonical answer required by Mohammad Golshani
Bounty Started worth 50 reputation by Mohammad Golshani
edited tags
Link
Mohammad Golshani
  • 32.1k
  • 2
  • 99
  • 198
Source Link
Mohammad Golshani
  • 32.1k
  • 2
  • 99
  • 198

Some questions about $0^{\sharp}$ and forcing over $L$

1-Let $P\in L$ be a nontrivial set forcing or even a tame class forcing (tameness in the sense of Sy Friedman; see for example his Handbook paper), and let $G$ be $P-$generic over $L$. Then it is well-known that in $L[G],$ $0^\sharp$ does not exist, hence by Jensen's covering lemma the pair $(L, L[G])$ satisfies the covering lemma; i.e any uncountable set $X \in L[G]$ of ordinals is covered by a set $Y\in L$ of the same cardinality.

Is there a direct proof of this fact without using Jensen's covering lemma and using the properties of $P$ and the fact that we are forcing over $L$?

2-Work in $L$. Let $P$ be the Easton support product of forcing notions $Add(\kappa^+, 1), \kappa$ a singular cardinal. Then $P$ is tame, preserves cardinals and the $GCH$. Is there any tame class forcing notion $Q$ such that forcing with $P\times Q$ over $L$ collapses all cardinals into $\omega$

Remark. It is possible to define a tame and cardinal preserving class forcing notion $P$ over $L$ whose product $P\times P$ collapses all cardinals into $\omega$.