1
$\begingroup$

I thought of the following large cardinal axiom, extending the notion of $\theta$-upliftingness:

Let $\eta$ be be an ordinal, and $X$ be a class of ordinals. $\kappa$ is called $\eta$-iteratively uplifting onto $X$ iff, for every ordinal $\theta$, there is a monotonically increasing sequence $(\gamma_i)_{0 \leq i \leq 1 + \eta}$ such that: (1) $\gamma_0 = \kappa$. (2) $\gamma_1 > \theta$ (3) For every $0 \leq i \leq 1 + \eta$, $\gamma_i \in X$ (3) For every $0 \leq i < j \leq 1 + \eta$, $(V_{\gamma_i}, \in) \prec (V_{\gamma_j}, \in)$ is a proper elementary extension.

It's easy to see that $\kappa$ is pseudo-uplifting iff it is $0$-iteratively uplifting onto $\textrm{Ord}$. Now, I'm wondering, how does $\eta$-iterative upliftingness (onto $\textrm{Ord}$) compare to $\eta$-shrewdness in the hierarchy of large cardinal consistency strength? Recall that $\eta$-shrewdness is defined like so:

Let $\eta$ be an ordinal. $\kappa$ is called $\eta$-shrewd iff, for every formula $\varphi$ and set $A \subseteq V_\kappa$ such that $(V_{\kappa+\eta}, \in, A) \vDash \varphi$, there exist $\bar{\kappa}, \bar{\eta} < \kappa$ such that $(V_{\bar{\kappa}+\bar{\eta}}, \in, A \cap V_{\bar{\kappa}}) \vDash \varphi$.

EDIT: This problem has been solved. It turns out that, for every $\eta$, the existence of a 1-shrewd cardinal above $\eta$ implies the consistency of a cardinal $\kappa$ which is $\eta$-iteratively uplifting on $\textrm{Ord}$.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

As Cantor's Attic explains, if $\kappa$ is 0-uplifting, that is, there is a cardinal $\lambda \gt \kappa$ such that $V_\kappa \prec V_\lambda$ and $\lambda$ is inaccesible, $\lambda$ has a club subset $C$ of cardinals such that $V_\kappa \prec V_{\gamma_1} \prec V_{\gamma_2} \prec... \prec V_\lambda$ for all $\gamma_1, \gamma_2... \in C$. Thus $\langle V_\lambda, C \rangle \vDash \text{$\kappa$ is Ord-iteratively uplifting onto Ord}$. As every Mahlo cardinal is a limit of 0-uplifting cardinals, the strength of these properties are below the bottom of the shrewdness hierarchy.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

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

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