8
$\begingroup$

Question: Is it possible to have a Mahlo cardinal $\kappa$ such that there is a $\kappa$.c.c. forcing that makes it non-Mahlo?

If this is possible then this forcing must change the cofinality of all but non stationary many inaccessible cardinals below $\kappa$, so at least large cardinals in the region of measurable cardinals of large Mitchell order seem to be unavoidable.

In order to avoid trivialities (such as $Add(\omega,\kappa), Col(\omega, <\kappa)$ ) I require, as Mohhamad suggested, that the forcing preserves the inaccessiblity of $\kappa$.

I'm also interested in the cases where the forcing make $\kappa$ weakly inaccessible, but still destroy its weak Mahloness.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think you should require the forcing preserves inaccessibility of $\kappa,$ as otherwise $Add(\omega, \kappa)$ is as required. $\endgroup$
    – Mohammad Golshani
    May 29, 2014 at 3:06

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

I asked this question from Prof. Woodin during the summer school in Singapore, and he gave me the following answer:

The answer is consistency yes. If we assume the existence of a Woodin cardinal and if we assume enough iterability, then we can use the extender algebra to turn a Woodin cardinal $\kappa$ into the least inaccessible cardinal using a $\kappa-c.c.$ forcing notion.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know the details of the argument, but I hope someone expert in such topics gives more details about the proof. $\endgroup$
    – Mohammad Golshani
    Jul 9, 2014 at 7:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.