Extensions with the approximation and cover properties have no new large cardinals

Fundamenta Mathematicae

Volumn 180, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 257-277

  Hamkins, Joel David ^a,b  

^a Mathematics Program ^*

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Forcing; Large cardinals

Indexed keywords

EID: 1942537910     PISSN: 00162736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4064/fm180-3-4     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. [Apt03] A. W. Apter, Indestructibility, strongneas, and level by level equivalence, Fund. Math. 177 (2003), 45-54.
2. [AH01] A. W. Apter and J. D. Hamkins, Indestructible weakly compact cardinals and the necessity of supercompactness for certain proof schemata, Math. Logic Quart. 47 (2001), 563-571.
3. [Ham] J. D. Hamkins, A class of strong diamond principles, arXiv:math.LO/0211419.
4. [Ham01] _, Gap forcing, Israel J. Math. 125 92001), 237-252.
5. [HS98] J. D. Hamkins and S. Shelah, Superdestructibility: a dual to Laver's indestructibility, ibid. 63 (1998), 549-554.
6. [HW00] J. D. Hamkins and W. H. Woodin, Small forcing creates neither strong nor Woodin cardinals, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 128 (2000), 3025-3029.
7. [Hau91] K. Hauser, Indescribable cardinals and elementary embeddings, J. Symbolic Logic 56 (1991), 439-457.
8. [Ket72] J. Ketonen, Strong compactness and other cardinal sins, Ann. Math. Logic 5 (1972), 47-76.
9. [Kun78] K. Kunen, Saturated ideals, J. Symbolic Logic 43 (1978), 65-76.
10. [Mit03] W. Mitchell, A Note on Hamkins' approximation lemma, available at http://www.math.ufl.edu/mitchell, December 2003.
11. [Vil98] A. Villaveces, Chains of end elementary extensions of models of set theory, J. Symbolic Logic 63 (1998), 1116-1136.