What is the consistency strength of existence of a nontrivial elementary embedding $j:L_δ→L_δ$ for some ordinal $δ$?

The consistency strength is strictly between totally ineffable and $ω$-Erdős cardinals, but I do not know where it should be placed relative to completely ineffable, 1-iterable, remarkable, 2-iterable, $n$-iterable cardinals ($n<ω$).

The least such $δ$ is also the least such that there is $S⊂δ$ with $|S|=ω$ and $S$ being indiscernibles for $L_δ$. (The latter formulation makes it a deceptively weak-looking statement.) Moreover, we can pick $S$ such that $S$ are good indiscernibles and also that every element of $L_δ$ is definable in $L_δ$ from a finite subset of $S$. $L_δ$ will satisfy ZFC with every $κ∈S$ (if we used good indiscernibles) totally ineffable and $L_κ≺L_δ$.

A theory with slightly weaker consistency strength, using language $(V,∈,j)$, is ZFC + $j$ is a nontrivial elementary elementary embedding $V→V$, with transfinite induction (least ordinal principle), but without separation and replacement for formulas involving $j$. (This avoids Kunen's inconsistency; see for example The spectrum of elementrary embeddings j : V → V by Paul Corazza.) I am also curious about the strength of that theory.

Ramsey-like cardinals and Ramsey-like cardinals II would suggest that the strength is above $n$-iterable. If that is correct, then for $n<ω$, existence of $α$ and $β$ with a nontrivial elementary embedding $j:L_α→L_β$ with $j^n(\mathrm{crit}(j))<α$ is likely interleaved in $Σ^1_2$ strength between $n-1$-iterable and $n$-iterable cardinals (if I am not off by 1). However, none of this is explicitly stated, and I do not know if I am missing some assumptions.


Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.