Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 145 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 53 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 28 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 30 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 127 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 200 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 433 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 32 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Generic Absoluteness Revisited (2410.15384v5)

Published 20 Oct 2024 in math.LO

Abstract: The present paper is concerned with the relation between recurrence axioms and Laver-generic large cardinal axioms in light of principles of generic absoluteness and the Ground Axiom. M. Viale proved that Martin's Maximum${++}$ together with the assumption that there are class many Woodin cardinals implies $\mathcal{H}(\aleph_2){\mathsf{V}}\prec_{\Sigma_2}\mathcal{H}(\aleph_2){\mathsf{V}[\mathbb{G}]}$ for a generic $\mathbb{G}$ on any stationary preserving $\mathbb{P}$ which also preserves Bounded Martin's Maximum. We show that a similar but more general conclusion follows from each of $(\mathcal{P},\mathcal{H}(\kappa)){\Sigma_2}$-${\sf RcA}+$ (which is a fragment of a reformulation of the Maximality Principle for $\mathcal{P}$ and $\mathcal{H}(\kappa)$), and the existence of the tightly $\mathcal{P}$-Laver-generically huge cardinal. While under "$\mathcal{P}=$ all stationary preserving posets", our results are not very much more than Viale's Theorem, for other classes of posets, "$\mathcal{P}=$ all proper posets" or "$\mathcal{P}=$ all ccc posets", for example, our theorems are not at all covered by his theorem. The assumptions (and hence also the conclusion) of Viale's Theorem are compatible with the Ground Axiom. In contrast, we show that the assumptions of our theorems (for most of the common settings of $\mathcal{P}$ and with a modification of the large cardinal property involved) imply the negation of the Ground Axiom. This fact is used to show that fragments of Recurrence Axiom $(\mathcal{P},\mathcal{H}(\kappa))\Gamma$-${\sf RcA}+$ can be different from the corresponding fragments of Maximality Principle ${\sf MP}(\mathcal{P},\mathcal{H}(\kappa))_\Gamma$ for $\Gamma=\Pi_2$.

Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 2 tweets and received 29 likes.

Upgrade to Pro to view all of the tweets about this paper: