Timeline for Is there a form of choice that can elude Kunen's inconsistency theorem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2023 at 12:56 | history | edited | Zuhair Al-Johar | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 50 characters in body
|
| Jan 14, 2023 at 2:31 | comment | added | Gabe Goldberg | @HanulJeon I think $\text{AC}_{\lambda^+}$ suffices to split $S^{\lambda^+}_\omega$ into $\lambda^+$ disjoint stationary sets, contrary to Woodin's proof. (The measurability of $\lambda^+$ is just a slight elaboration on Woodin's proof in the $\text{DC}_{\lambda^+}$ context; it's Woodin's proof plus Ulam splitting.) | |
| Jan 14, 2023 at 2:08 | comment | added | Hanul Jeon | Could we argue that $\mathsf{DC}_{\lambda^+}$ does not hold because we can carry over Woodin's proof of Kunen inconsistency with $\mathsf{DC}_{\lambda^+}$? Does the measurability of $\lambda^+$ give a stronger fact that $\mathsf{AC}_{\lambda^+}$ is incompatible with the Reinhardtness? | |
| Jan 13, 2023 at 17:46 | history | edited | Gabe Goldberg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jan 12, 2023 at 21:05 | vote | accept | Zuhair Al-Johar | ||
| Jan 12, 2023 at 20:38 | history | edited | Gabe Goldberg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 326 characters in body
|
| Jan 12, 2023 at 20:33 | history | answered | Gabe Goldberg | CC BY-SA 4.0 |