Large transitive models in local {\rm ZFC}

This paper is a sequel to \cite{Tz10}, where a local version of ZFC, LZFC, was introduced and examined and transitive models of ZFC with properties that resemble large cardinal properties, namely Mahlo and $\Pi_1^1$-indescribable models, were considered. By analogy we refer to such models as "large models", and the properties in question as "large model properties". Continuing here in the same spirit we consider further large model properties, that resemble stronger large cardinals, namely, "elementarily embeddable", "extendible" and "strongly extendible", "critical" and "strongly critical", "self-critical'' and "strongly self-critical", the definitions of which involve elementary embeddings. Each large model property $\phi$ gives rise to a localization axiom $Loc^{\phi}({\rm ZFC})$ saying that every set belongs to a transitive model of ZFC satisfying $\phi$. The theories ${\rm LZFC}^\phi={\rm LZFC}$+$Loc^{\phi}({\rm ZFC})$ are local analogues of the theories ZFC+"there is a proper class of large cardinals $\psi$", where $\psi$ is a large cardinal property. If $sext(x)$ is the property of strong extendibility, it is shown that ${\rm LZFC}^{sext}$ proves Powerset and $\Sigma_1$-Collection. In order to refute $V=L$ over LZFC, we combine the existence of strongly critical models with an axiom of different flavor, the Tall Model Axiom ($TMA$). $V=L$ can also be refuted by $TMA$ plus the axiom $GC$ saying that "there is a greatest cardinal", although it is not known if $TMA+GC$ is consistent over LZFC. Finally Vop\v{e}nka's Principle ($VP$) and its impact on LZFC are examined. It is shown that ${\rm LZFC}^{sext}+VP$ proves Powerset and Replacement, i.e., ZFC is fully recovered. The same is true for some weaker variants of ${\rm LZFC}^{sext}$. Moreover the theories LZFC$^{sext}$+$VP$ and ZFC+$VP$ are shown to be identical.Comment: 32 page

Definable orthogonality classes in accessible categories are small

We lower substantially the strength of the assumptions needed for the validity of certain results in category theory and homotopy theory which were known to follow from Vopenka's principle. We prove that the necessary large-cardinal hypotheses depend on the complexity of the formulas defining the given classes, in the sense of the Levy hierarchy. For example, the statement that, for a class S of morphisms in a locally presentable category C of structures, the orthogonal class of objects is a small-orthogonality class (hence reflective) is provable in ZFC if S is \Sigma_1, while it follows from the existence of a proper class of supercompact cardinals if S is \Sigma_2, and from the existence of a proper class of what we call C(n)-extendible cardinals if S is \Sigma_{n+2} for n bigger than or equal to 1. These cardinals form a new hierarchy, and we show that Vopenka's principle is equivalent to the existence of C(n)-extendible cardinals for all n. As a consequence, we prove that the existence of cohomological localizations of simplicial sets, a long-standing open problem in algebraic topology, is implied by the existence of arbitrarily large supercompact cardinals. This result follows from the fact that cohomology equivalences are \Sigma_2. In contrast with this fact, homology equivalences are \Sigma_1, from which it follows (as is well known) that the existence of homological localizations is provable in ZFC.Comment: 38 pages; some results have been improved and former inaccuracies have been correcte

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

Set-Theoretic Geology

A ground of the universe V is a transitive proper class W subset V, such that W is a model of ZFC and V is obtained by set forcing over W, so that V = W[G] for some W-generic filter G subset P in W . The model V satisfies the ground axiom GA if there are no such W properly contained in V . The model W is a bedrock of V if W is a ground of V and satisfies the ground axiom. The mantle of V is the intersection of all grounds of V . The generic mantle of V is the intersection of all grounds of all set-forcing extensions of V . The generic HOD, written gHOD, is the intersection of all HODs of all set-forcing extensions. The generic HOD is always a model of ZFC, and the generic mantle is always a model of ZF. Every model of ZFC is the mantle and generic mantle of another model of ZFC. We prove this theorem while also controlling the HOD of the final model, as well as the generic HOD. Iteratively taking the mantle penetrates down through the inner mantles to what we call the outer core, what remains when all outer layers of forcing have been stripped away. Many fundamental questions remain open.Comment: 44 pages; commentary concerning this article can be made at http://jdh.hamkins.org/set-theoreticgeology

Non-Absoluteness of Model Existence at ℵω\aleph_\omega

In [FHK13], the authors considered the question whether model-existence of $L_{\omega_1,\omega}$-sentences is absolute for transitive models of ZFC, in the sense that if $V \subseteq W$ are transitive models of ZFC with the same ordinals, $\varphi\in V$ and $V\models "\varphi \text{ is an } L_{\omega_1,\omega}\text{-sentence}"$, then $V \models "\varphi \text{ has a model of size } \aleph_\alpha"$ if and only if $W \models "\varphi \text{ has a model of size } \aleph_\alpha"$. From [FHK13] we know that the answer is positive for $\alpha=0,1$ and under the negation of CH, the answer is negative for all $\alpha>1$. Under GCH, and assuming the consistency of a supercompact cardinal, the answer remains negative for each $\alpha>1$, except the case when $\alpha=\omega$ which is an open question in [FHK13]. We answer the open question by providing a negative answer under GCH even for $\alpha=\omega$. Our examples are incomplete sentences. In fact, the same sentences can be used to prove a negative answer under GCH for all $\alpha>1$ assuming the consistency of a Mahlo cardinal. Thus, the large cardinal assumption is relaxed from a supercompact in [FHK13] to a Mahlo cardinal. Finally, we consider the absoluteness question for the $\aleph_\alpha$-amalgamation property of $L_{\omega_1,\omega}$-sentences (under substructure). We prove that assuming GCH, $\aleph_\alpha$-amalgamation is non-absolute for $1<\alpha<\omega$. This answers a question from [SS]. The cases $\alpha=1$ and $\alpha$ infinite remain open. As a corollary we get that it is non-absolute that the amalgamation spectrum of an $L_{\omega_1,\omega}$-sentence is empty