6
$\begingroup$

One of the magnificent theorems of $\sf ZFC$ is that there exists an Aronszajn tree on $\omega_1$. Namely, a tree of height $\omega_1$ in which every level is countable, but no branch is cofinal.

On the other hand, assuming the consistency of a weakly compact, $\sf ZFC$ does not prove that every tree on $\omega_2$—or any successor of an uncountable regular cardinal—which has levels of size less than $\aleph_2$ has a cofinal branch.

This raises a very natural question:

Is there some natural combinatorial property which holds or fails at $\omega_1$ if and only if $\omega_1$ is weakly compact in $L$?

(We can replace "weakly compact in $L$" by "There is a weakly compact cardinal in $L$" if that holds somehow; but usually we expect the cardinal with the failure to be that weakly compact.)


Both in a deleted comment and a deleted answer the Shelah–Harrington theorem was suggested that showed that under $\sf MA+\lnot CH$, $\omega_1$ is weakly compact if and only if every $\mathbf\Sigma^1_3$ is measurable if and only if ever $\mathbf\Delta^1_3$ set has the Baire property.

These are not quite combinatorial characteristics of $\omega_1$, but rather [somewhat-]topological characteristics of the continuum, which is not even $\omega_1$ here. Moreover, if anything is to be quoted from the said paper, it should be the theorem stating that under $\sf MA+\lnot CH$, $\omega_1$ is weakly compact in $L$ if it is inaccessible to reals.

A weakening of the original question could be, suppose $\kappa$ is weakly compact, and we force with $\operatorname{Col}(\omega,<\kappa)$. What combinatorial properties of $\kappa$ survive the collapse, and whose consistency at $\omega_1$ implies weak compactness in $L$?

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ That is what Mohammad wrote in his now-deleted answer. But I agree that this is not exactly what I was looking for. This is more of a combinatorial property of the continuum, which is definitely not $\omega_1$. But it is an interesting fact, so thank you both for bringing this up. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    Nov 23, 2016 at 22:40
  • $\begingroup$ (Also, if anything, then the result that MA implies that $\omega_1$ is either computable from a real or weakly compact in L is far more relevant here; that's Theorem C(i) in the linked paper.) $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    Nov 23, 2016 at 22:44
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I made an edit which was not correct, and deleted it now since you know about it and I was getting into a muddle about it. Perhaps you could mention in your question that such an answer doesn't count? $\endgroup$
    – tci
    Nov 23, 2016 at 22:46
  • $\begingroup$ I'll edit this tomorrow. I'll sleep on this and see if the morning will bring some better insights as to what are "natural properties" or what aren't. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    Nov 23, 2016 at 22:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A characterization is given in the paper "Gitik, M.; Magidor, M.; Woodin, H. Two weak consequences of 0♯. J. Symbolic Logic 50 (1985), no. 3, 597–603." but I don't know if it is interesting to you or not. The statement is "There is a club $C$ of $\aleph_1$ consisting of L-inaccessible cardinals such that for each $\alpha$ a limit point of $C, C \cap \alpha$ is almost contained in every closed unbounded subset of $\alpha$ in L". $\endgroup$ Nov 24, 2016 at 4:48

0

Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.