Timeline for Is there nontrivial structure to forcing axioms?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 28, 2017 at 7:37 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | Now I'm not sure whether or not the standard notation is that $\operatorname{FA}_\kappa$ means there is a filter meeting every $\kappa$ dense sets, or if I should just add the requirement that $\kappa>\aleph_1$. | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 18:56 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila♦ | You're right. There's also some discrepancy in the example I gave in the question itself. I'll fix this later when I'm at a computer again. Thanks! | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 18:37 | comment | added | Miha Habič | The way you wrote it, PFA is compatible with CH (in particular it doesn't imply $\kappa=\aleph_2$). To make things nontrivial we should just always require that $\kappa$ is at least $\aleph_2$ when talking about $\mathrm{FA}_\kappa$ (this applies to your question too). | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 18:18 | answer | added | Mohammad Golshani | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 16:10 | answer | added | Will Brian | timeline score: 7 | |
| Feb 27, 2017 at 15:32 | history | asked | Asaf Karagila♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |