- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Strong compactness and other cardinal sins
Annals of Mathematical Logic 5 (1):47 (1972)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
On strong compactness and supercompactness.Telis K. Menas - 1975 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 7 (4):327-359.
Tallness and level by level equivalence and inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2010 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 56 (1):4-12.
How far is almost strong compactness from strong compactness.Zhixing You & Jiachen Yuan - forthcoming - Journal of Mathematical Logic.
Indestructibility under adding Cohen subsets and level by level equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2009 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 55 (3):271-279.
Failures of SCH and Level by Level Equivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 45 (7):831-838.
Indestructible strong compactness and level by level inequivalence.Arthur W. Apter - 2013 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 59 (4-5):371-377.
Failure of GCH and the level by level equivalence between strong compactness and supercompactness.Arthur W. Apter - 2003 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 49 (6):587.
Supercompactness and level by level equivalence are compatible with indestructibility for strong compactness.Arthur W. Apter - 2007 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 46 (3-4):155-163.
Precisely controlling level by level behavior.Arthur W. Apter - 2017 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 63 (1-2):77-84.
The least strongly compact can be the least strong and indestructible.Arthur W. Apter - 2006 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 144 (1-3):33-42.
Analytics
Added to PP
2014-01-17
Downloads
38 (#601,350)
6 months
6 (#901,624)
2014-01-17
Downloads
38 (#601,350)
6 months
6 (#901,624)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Strong axioms of infinity and elementary embeddings.Robert M. Solovay - 1978 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 13 (1):73.
Club-guessing, stationary reflection, and coloring theorems.Todd Eisworth - 2010 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 161 (10):1216-1243.
The linearity of the Mitchell order.Gabriel Goldberg - 2018 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 18 (1):1850005.
Strongly compact cardinals and ordinal definability.Gabriel Goldberg - 2023 - Journal of Mathematical Logic 24 (1).
References found in this work
Some applications of iterated ultrapowers in set theory.Kenneth Kunen - 1970 - Annals of Mathematical Logic 1 (2):179.
On the cardinality of ultraproduct of finite sets.Saharon Shelah - 1970 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (1):83-84.
Robert M. Solovay. A model of set-theory in which every set of reals is Lebesgue measurable. Annals of mathematics, ser. 2 vol. 92 , pp. 1–56. [REVIEW]Richard Laver - 1973 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 38 (3):529.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-648784bb4d-72rpk uwo