Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 8, 2013 at 20:57 history edited François G. Dorais CC BY-SA 3.0
revised and expanded
Sep 7, 2013 at 23:55 vote accept Victoria Gitman
Sep 7, 2013 at 21:11 history edited François G. Dorais CC BY-SA 3.0
extra details
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:37 comment added François G. Dorais (Email me if you want more details on the "little more." These comment boxes are too small...)
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:36 comment added François G. Dorais $F_\sigma$-Mathias forcing is proper. That's not in the paper but I do comment on it.
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:35 comment added Victoria Gitman I see that your forcing satisfies axiom A, so it is proper.
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:31 comment added Victoria Gitman Ideally, I would like a proper forcing notion, where it is sufficient to meet some $\omega_1$-many dense sets to ensure that the arithmetic closure of $\mathfrak X\cup \{A\}$ avoids $C$. But it is great to know about your example because it means that there is no obstacle to what I want to do!
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:27 comment added François G. Dorais Not the stronger cone-avoiding theorem but what you need is just a little more than the relativized version of the cone-avoiding theorem that I do prove in the paper.
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:25 comment added Victoria Gitman Is this all written up in the paper? What are some properties of the forcing?
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:22 history edited François G. Dorais CC BY-SA 3.0
conclusion
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:22 comment added Victoria Gitman François, I think I can construct such an $A$ also. But what I need is that $C$ is not definable from $A$, so not computable from any jump of $A$.
Sep 7, 2013 at 20:09 history answered François G. Dorais CC BY-SA 3.0