Skip to main content
Notice removed Draw attention by CommunityBot
Bounty Ended with no winning answer by CommunityBot
Notice added Draw attention by Noah Schweber
Bounty Started worth 150 reputation by Noah Schweber
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
Source Link

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbersA question about ordinal definable real numbers   . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset $D$ of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers  . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset $D$ of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers  . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset $D$ of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

added 4 characters in body
Source Link

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset $D$ of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset $D$ of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

added 16 characters in body
Source Link
Andrés E. Caicedo
  • 32.5k
  • 5
  • 133
  • 240

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g. A question about ordinal definable real numbers . A negative answer was obtained in Archive for Mathematical Logic 2015, 54, 5, 711-723, on the base of a very non-homogeneous forcing notion, in fact a clone of Jensen's minimal-$\Pi^1_2$-singleton forcing. In the opposite direction, one would believe that typical homogeneous-forcing models (Cohen, random, Solovay etc) provide a positive answer. And indeed it holds in a simple Cohen extension $L[a]$ that

(1) a countable OD set of reals necessarily contains an OD element (see arxiv1)

Is the following stronger claim still true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

(2) a countable OD set of sets of reals (or weaker but in fact equivalent, an OD partition of an OD subset of $\mathbb R$ into countably many pieces) necessarily contains an OD element

The key step would be to prove (2) restricted to the domain $$ D=\{x\in\mathbb R\cap L[a]:x\text{ is Cohen and }L[x]=L[a]\}. $$ And now, one may want to get a counterexample of the following kind. Let $G$ be the group of Borel category-preserving bijections of the reals, coded in $L$. Suppose $G$ is presented in the form $G=C\times U$, where $C$ is a countable subgroup and $U$ a subgroup. Then $D$ is invariant under the action of $G$, but one may hope that there are countably many of $U$-orbits in $D$ (as $C$ countable), none of which is OD.

To conclude, is (2) true in Cohen's $L[a]$?

edited tags
Link
Asaf Karagila
  • 39.9k
  • 8
  • 135
  • 283
Loading
Source Link
Loading