Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 10, 2013 at 14:39 history edited Joel David Hamkins CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 31 characters in body
Nov 10, 2013 at 14:09 history edited Joel David Hamkins CC BY-SA 3.0
Remove indescribable case
Nov 2, 2013 at 18:54 comment added Joel David Hamkins Yes, Carlo, I agree with that. But being $\Sigma_2$-extendible is much weaker than being $\Sigma_2$-correct, which are the cardinals you get by reflection. Indeed, every $\Sigma_2$-correct cardinal is a limit of $\Sigma_2$-extendible cardinals.
Nov 2, 2013 at 18:51 comment added Rachid Atmai Actually one can prove that $\Sigma_2$-extendible cardinals exist just using the reflection theorem. There is cub-many such cardinals, provided they're not inaccessible (just as you've said).
Nov 2, 2013 at 17:56 comment added Joel David Hamkins That result about strongly Ramsey cardinals (as well as the definition of these cardinals) is due to Victoria Gitman.
Nov 2, 2013 at 16:12 comment added Joel David Hamkins @MohammadGolshani, no, Ramsey cardinals are not necessarily $\Sigma_2$-reflecting, and one can make the GCH fail first at them. This is easier to see with the strongly Ramsey cardinals, which can easily be made indestructible by $\text{Add}(\kappa,1)$.
Nov 2, 2013 at 16:11 history edited Joel David Hamkins CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1510 characters in body
Nov 2, 2013 at 12:58 vote accept CommunityBot
Nov 2, 2013 at 12:58 comment added user42090 Interesting and a bit surprising! Thanks Joel.
Nov 2, 2013 at 12:54 comment added Mohammad Golshani Dear Prof. Hamkins, your answer is really interesting. Are Ramsey cardinals $\Sigma_2$ reflecting, and if not, then can they be the first cardinal violating the GCH
Nov 2, 2013 at 12:39 history answered Joel David Hamkins CC BY-SA 3.0