The proof-theoretic strength of Ramsey's theorem for pairs and two colors

Ramsey's theorem for $n$-tuples and $k$-colors ($\mathsf{RT}^n_k$) asserts that every k-coloring of $[\mathbb{N}]^n$ admits an infinite monochromatic subset. We study the proof-theoretic strength of Ramsey's theorem for pairs and two colors, namely, the set of its $\Pi^0_1$ consequences, and show that $\mathsf{RT}^2_2$ is $\Pi^0_3$ conservative over $\mathsf{I}\Sigma^0_1$. This strengthens the proof of Chong, Slaman and Yang that $\mathsf{RT}^2_2$ does not imply $\mathsf{I}\Sigma^0_2$, and shows that $\mathsf{RT}^2_2$ is finitistically reducible, in the sense of Simpson's partial realization of Hilbert's Program. Moreover, we develop general tools to simplify the proofs of $\Pi^0_3$-conservation theorems.Comment: 32 page

Every countable model of set theory embeds into its own constructible universe

The main theorem of this article is that every countable model of set theory M, including every well-founded model, is isomorphic to a submodel of its own constructible universe. In other words, there is an embedding $j:M\to L^M$ that is elementary for quantifier-free assertions. The proof uses universal digraph combinatorics, including an acyclic version of the countable random digraph, which I call the countable random Q-graded digraph, and higher analogues arising as uncountable Fraisse limits, leading to the hypnagogic digraph, a set-homogeneous, class-universal, surreal-numbers-graded acyclic class digraph, closely connected with the surreal numbers. The proof shows that $L^M$ contains a submodel that is a universal acyclic digraph of rank $Ord^M$. The method of proof also establishes that the countable models of set theory are linearly pre-ordered by embeddability: for any two countable models of set theory, one of them is isomorphic to a submodel of the other. Indeed, they are pre-well-ordered by embedability in order-type exactly $\omega_1+1$. Specifically, the countable well-founded models are ordered by embeddability in accordance with the heights of their ordinals; every shorter model embeds into every taller model; every model of set theory $M$ is universal for all countable well-founded binary relations of rank at most $Ord^M$; and every ill-founded model of set theory is universal for all countable acyclic binary relations. Finally, strengthening a classical theorem of Ressayre, the same proof method shows that if $M$ is any nonstandard model of PA, then every countable model of set theory---in particular, every model of ZFC---is isomorphic to a submodel of the hereditarily finite sets $HF^M$ of $M$. Indeed, $HF^M$ is universal for all countable acyclic binary relations.Comment: 25 pages, 2 figures. Questions and commentary can be made at http://jdh.hamkins.org/every-model-embeds-into-own-constructible-universe. (v2 adds a reference and makes minor corrections) (v3 includes further changes, and removes the previous theorem 15, which was incorrect.

The modal logic of set-theoretic potentialism and the potentialist maximality principles

We analyze the precise modal commitments of several natural varieties of set-theoretic potentialism, using tools we develop for a general model-theoretic account of potentialism, building on those of Hamkins, Leibman and L\"owe, including the use of buttons, switches, dials and ratchets. Among the potentialist conceptions we consider are: rank potentialism (true in all larger $V_\beta$); Grothendieck-Zermelo potentialism (true in all larger $V_\kappa$ for inaccessible cardinals $\kappa$); transitive-set potentialism (true in all larger transitive sets); forcing potentialism (true in all forcing extensions); countable-transitive-model potentialism (true in all larger countable transitive models of ZFC); countable-model potentialism (true in all larger countable models of ZFC); and others. In each case, we identify lower bounds for the modal validities, which are generally either S4.2 or S4.3, and an upper bound of S5, proving in each case that these bounds are optimal. The validity of S5 in a world is a potentialist maximality principle, an interesting set-theoretic principle of its own. The results can be viewed as providing an analysis of the modal commitments of the various set-theoretic multiverse conceptions corresponding to each potentialist account.Comment: 36 pages. Commentary can be made about this article at http://jdh.hamkins.org/set-theoretic-potentialism. Minor revisions in v2; further minor revisions in v

Logical Dreams

We discuss the past and future of set theory, axiom systems and independence results. We deal in particular with cardinal arithmetic