Works by Joel David Hamkins ( view other items matching `Joel David Hamkins`, view all matches )

20 found
Sort by:
  1. Joel David Hamkins, David Linetsky & Jonas Reitz (2013). Pointwise Definable Models of Set Theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic 78 (1):139-156.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Samuel Coskey & Joel David Hamkins (2010). Infinite Time Decidable Equivalence Relation Theory. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (2):203-228.
    We introduce an analogue of the theory of Borel equivalence relations in which we study equivalence relations that are decidable by an infinite time Turing machine. The Borel reductions are replaced by the more general class of infinite time computable functions. Many basic aspects of the classical theory remain intact, with the added bonus that it becomes sensible to study some special equivalence relations whose complexity is beyond Borel or even analytic. We also introduce an infinite time generalization of the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Victoria Gitman & Joel David Hamkins (2010). A Natural Model of the Multiverse Axioms. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (4):475-484.
    If ZFC is consistent, then the collection of countable computably saturated models of ZFC satisfies all of the Multiverse Axioms of Hamkins.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Joel David Hamkins & Thomas A. Johnstone (2010). Indestructible Strong Unfoldability. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):291-321.
    Using the lottery preparation, we prove that any strongly unfoldable cardinal $\kappa$ can be made indestructible by all.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Gunter Fuchs & Joel David Hamkins (2009). Degrees of Rigidity for Souslin Trees. Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (2):423-454.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Gunter Fuchs & Joel David Hamkins (2008). Changing the Heights of Automorphism Towers by Forcing with Souslin Trees Over L. Journal of Symbolic Logic 73 (2):614-633.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Joel David Hamkins & Alexei Miasnikov (2006). The Halting Problem Is Decidable on a Set of Asymptotic Probability One. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 47 (4):515-524.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Arthur W. Apter & Joel David Hamkins (2003). Exactly Controlling the Non-Supercompact Strongly Compact Cardinals. Journal of Symbolic Logic 68 (2):669-688.
    We summarize the known methods of producing a non-supercompact strongly compact cardinal and describe some new variants. Our Main Theorem shows how to apply these methods to many cardinals simultaneously and exactly control which cardinals are supercompact and which are only strongly compact in a forcing extension. Depending upon the method, the surviving non-supercompact strongly compact cardinals can be strong cardinals, have trivial Mitchell rank or even contain a club disjoint from the set of measurable cardinals. These results improve and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Joel David Hamkins (2003). A Simple Maximality Principle. Journal of Symbolic Logic 68 (2):527-550.
    In this paper, following an idea of Christophe Chalons. I propose a new kind of forcing axiom, the Maximality Principle, which asserts that any sentence varphi holding in some forcing extension $V^P$ and all subsequent extensions $V^{P\ast Q}$ holds already in V. It follows, in fact, that such sentences must also hold in all forcing extensions of V. In modal terms, therefore, the Maximality Principle is expressed by the scheme $(\lozenge \square \varphi) \Rightarrow \square \varphi$ , and is equivalent to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Arthur W. Apter & Joel David Hamkins (2002). Indestructibility and the Level-by-Level Agreement Between Strong Compactness and Supercompactness. Journal of Symbolic Logic 67 (2):820-840.
    Can a supercompact cardinal κ be Laver indestructible when there is a level-by-level agreement between strong compactness and supercompactness? In this article, we show that if there is a sufficiently large cardinal above κ, then no, it cannot. Conversely, if one weakens the requirement either by demanding less indestructibility, such as requiring only indestructibility by stratified posets, or less level-by-level agreement, such as requiring it only on measure one sets, then yes, it can.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Donniell Fishkind, Joel David Hamkins & Barbara Montero (2002). New Inconsistencies in Infinite Utilitarianism: Is Every World Good, Bad or Neutral? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80 (2):178 – 190.
    In the context of worlds with infinitely many bearers of utility, we argue that several collections of natural Utilitarian principles--principles which are certainly true in the classical finite Utilitarian context and which any Utilitarian would find appealing--are inconsistent.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Joel David Hamkins (2002). Infinite Time Turing Machines. Minds and Machines 12 (4):567-604.
    Infinite time Turing machines extend the operation of ordinary Turing machines into transfinite ordinal time. By doing so, they provide a natural model of infinitary computability, a theoretical setting for the analysis of the power and limitations of supertask algorithms.
    No categories
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Joel David Hamkins (2001). Unfoldable Cardinals and the GCH. Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (3):1186-1198.
    Unfoldable cardinals are preserved by fast function forcing and the Laver-like preparations that fast functions support. These iterations show, by set-forcing over any model of ZFC, that any given unfoldable cardinal κ can be made indestructible by the forcing to add any number of Cohen subsets to κ.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Joel David Hamkins & Andy Lewis (2000). Infinite Time Turing Machines. Journal of Symbolic Logic 65 (2):567-604.
    Infinite time Turing machines extend the operation of ordinary Turing machines into transfinite ordinal time. By doing so, they provide a natural model of infinitary computability, a theoretical setting for the analysis of the power and limitations of supertask algorithms.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Joel David Hamkins & Barbara Montero (2000). With Infinite Utility, More Needn't Be Better. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 78 (2):231 – 240.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Joel David Hamkins & Barbara Montero (2000). Utilitarianism in Infinite Worlds. Utilitas 12 (01):91-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Joel David Hamkins (1999). Gap Forcing: Generalizing the Lévy-Solovay Theorem. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):264-272.
    The Lévy-Solovay Theorem [8] limits the kind of large cardinal embeddings that can exist in a small forcing extension. Here I announce a generalization of this theorem to a broad new class of forcing notions. One consequence is that many of the forcing iterations most commonly found in the large cardinal literature create no new weakly compact cardinals, measurable cardinals, strong cardinals, Woodin cardinals, strongly compact cardinals, supercompact cardinals, almost huge cardinals, huge cardinals, and so on.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Joel David Hamkins (1998). Small Forcing Makes Any Cardinal Superdestructible. Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (1):51-58.
    Small forcing always ruins the indestructibility of an indestructible supercompact cardinal. In fact, after small forcing, any cardinal κ becomes superdestructible--any further <κ--closed forcing which adds a subset to κ will destroy the measurability, even the weak compactness, of κ. Nevertheless, after small forcing indestructible cardinals remain resurrectible, but never strongly resurrectible.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Joel David Hamkins & Saharon Shelah (1998). Superdestructibility: A Dual to Laver's Indestructibility. Journal of Symbolic Logic 63 (2):549-554.
    After small forcing, any $ -closed forcing will destroy the supercompactness and even the strong compactness of κ.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Joel David Hamkins (1997). Canonical Seeds and Prikry Trees. Journal of Symbolic Logic 62 (2):373-396.
    Applying the seed concept to Prikry tree forcing P μ , I investigate how well P μ preserves the maximality property of ordinary Prikry forcing and prove that P μ Prikry sequences are maximal exactly when μ admits no non-canonical seeds via a finite iteration. In particular, I conclude that if μ is a strongly normal supercompactness measure, then P μ Prikry sequences are maximal, thereby proving, for a large class of measures, a conjecture of W. Hugh Woodin's.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation