Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Meanwhile, in my recent paper on CH, I propose another thought experiment showing how the CH and even the GCH could have been fundamental. riviste.fupress.net/index.php/jpm/article/view/2936 Your axiom would thereby become a theorem.
@DanielAsimov In my paper on the set-theoretic multiverse, I make a thought experiment about the Powerset-size axiom (your axiom) and whether it might be accepted as a fundamental axiom, with a reference to this MO answer. But currently, it is not considered a candidate. The GCH is even stronger, and is sometimes mentioned, and set theorists find it worthwhile to study, but few are willing to add it once and for all as a fundamental principle.
Very nice question! My result with Enayat is about definable class trees and definable paths, so it only rules out $\lambda=\kappa+1$ as not large enough. It could be that the paths come right away after that, or perhaps one must wait a long time, but I'm just not sure.
I just meant that if $|A|=|\cup x|$, meaning they are equinumerous, then $A$ is equinumerous with $\cup x$, and so we can replace $x$ with $x'$ where $A=\cup x'$. So that part of your change didn't actually change anything. Meanwhile, the rest of my answer here does use that $\omega_1$ is well-orderable, so that all the cardinals below it are also well-orderable, and this is how I concluded that $x$ must be countable and that the elements of $x$ must be countable as well, and indeed finite for the hypersingular case.