Set Theory

The objective of this article is to present an original proof of the following theorem: Thereis a generic extension of the Solovay’s model L(R) where there is a linear order of P(N)/fin that extends to the partial order (P(N)/f in), ≤*). Linear orders of P(N)/fin are important because, among other reasons, they allow constructing non-measurable sets, moreover they are applied in Ramsey's Theory .

Ultrafilters are very important mathematical objects in mathematical research [6, 22, 23]. There are a wide variety of classical theorems in various branches of mathematics where ultrafilters are applied in their proof, and other classical theorems that deal directly with ultrafilters. The objective of this article is to contribute (in a divulgative way) to ultrafilter research by describing the demonstrations of some such theorems related (uniquely or in combination) to topology, measurement theory, algebra, combinatorial infinite, set theory y first-order logic, (...) also formulating some updated open problems of set theory that refer to non-main ultrafilters on N, the Mathias’s model and the Solovay’s model. (shrink)

El objetivo de este artículo es presentar dos tópicos de Lógica matemática y sus fundamentos: El primer tópico es una actualización de la demostración de Alonzo Church del Teorema de completitud de Gödel para la Lógica de primer orden, la cual aparece en su texto "Introduction to Mathematical Logic" (1956) y usa el procedimientos efectivos de Forma normal prenexa y Forma normal de Skolem; y el segundo tópico es una demostración de que la propiedad de partición (tipo Ramsey) del espacio (...) topológico de Baire llamada "Propiedad de partición polarizada" es falsa en el Modelo Básico de Cohen. (shrink)

The paper is a continuation of another paper published as Part I. Now, the case of “n=3” is inferred as a corollary from the Kochen and Specker theorem (1967): the eventual solutions of Fermat’s equation for “n=3” would correspond to an admissible disjunctive division of qubit into two absolutely independent parts therefore versus the contextuality of any qubit, implied by the Kochen – Specker theorem. Incommensurability (implied by the absence of hidden variables) is considered as dual to quantum contextuality. The (...) relevant mathematical structure is Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense, in the framework of which Hilbert arithmetic in a narrow sense and the qubit Hilbert space are dual to each other. A few cases involving set theory are possible: (1) only within the case “n=3” and implicitly, within any next level of “n” in Fermat’s equation; (2) the identification of the case “n=3” and the general case utilizing the axiom of choice rather than the axiom of induction. If the former is the case, the application of set theory and arithmetic can remain disjunctively divided: set theory, “locally”, within any level; and arithmetic, “globally”, to all levels. If the latter is the case, the proof is thoroughly within set theory. Thus, the relevance of Yablo’s paradox to the statement of Fermat’s last theorem is avoided in both cases. The idea of “arithmetic mechanics” is sketched: it might deduce the basic physical dimensions of mechanics (mass, time, distance) from the axioms of arithmetic after a relevant generalization, Furthermore, a future Part III of the paper is suggested: FLT by mediation of Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense can be considered as another expression of Gleason’s theorem in quantum mechanics: the exclusions about (n = 1, 2) in both theorems as well as the validity for all the rest values of “n” can be unified after the theory of quantum information. The availability (respectively, non-availability) of solutions of Fermat’s equation can be proved as equivalent to the non-availability (respectively, availability) of a single probabilistic measure as to Gleason’s theorem. (shrink)

We investigate, in ZFC, the behavior of abstract elementary classes categorical in many successive small cardinals. We prove for example that a universal $\mathbb {L}_{\omega _1, \omega }$ sentence categorical on an end segment of cardinals below $\beth _\omega $ must be categorical also everywhere above $\beth _\omega $. This is done without any additional model-theoretic hypotheses and generalizes to the much broader framework of tame AECs with weak amalgamation and coherent sequences.

We study closure properties of measurable ultrapowers with respect to Hamkin's notion of freshness and show that the extent of these properties highly depends on the combinatorial properties of the underlying model of set theory. In one direction, a result of Sakai shows that, by collapsing a strongly compact cardinal to become the double successor of a measurable cardinal, it is possible to obtain a model of set theory in which such ultrapowers possess the strongest possible closure properties. In the (...) other direction, we use various square principles to show that measurable ultrapowers of canonical inner models only possess the minimal amount of closure properties. In addition, the techniques developed in the proofs of these results also allow us to derive statements about the consistency strength of the existence of measurable ultrapowers with non-minimal closure properties. (shrink)

We investigate the Tukey order in the class of Fσ ideals of subsets of ω. We show that no nontrivial Fσ ideal is Tukey below a Gδ ideal of compact sets. We introduce the notions of flat ideals and gradually flat ideals. We prove a dichotomy theorem for flat ideals isolating gradual flatness as the side of the dichotomy that is structurally good. We give diverse characterizations of gradual flatness among flat ideals using Tukey reductions and games. For example, we (...) show that gradually flat ideals are precisely those flat ideals that are Tukey below the ideal of density zero sets. (shrink)

Extending Aanderaa’s classical result that $\pi ^{1}_{1} < \sigma ^{1}_{1}$, we determine the order between any two patterns of iterated $\Sigma ^{1}_{1}$ - and $\Pi ^{1}_{1}$ -reflection on ordinals. We show that this order of linear reflection is a prewellordering of length $\omega ^{\omega }$. This requires considering the relationship between linear and some non-linear reflection patterns, such as $\sigma \wedge \pi $, the pattern of simultaneous $\Sigma ^{1}_{1}$ - and $\Pi ^{1}_{1}$ -reflection. The proofs involve linking the lengths of (...) $\alpha $ -recursive wellorderings to various forms of stability and reflection properties satisfied by ordinals $\alpha $ within standard and non-standard models of set theory. (shrink)

In contrast to the robust mutual interpretability phenomenon in set theory, Ali Enayat proved that bi-interpretation is absent: distinct theories extending ZF are never bi-interpretable and models of ZF are bi-interpretable only when they are isomorphic. Nevertheless, for natural weaker set theories, we prove, including Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory $\mathrm {ZFC}^{-}$ without power set and Zermelo set theory Z, there are nontrivial instances of bi-interpretation. Specifically, there are well-founded models of $\mathrm {ZFC}^{-}$ that are bi-interpretable, but not isomorphic—even $\langle H_{\omega _1},\in (...) \rangle $ and $ \langle H_{\omega _2},\in \rangle $ can be bi-interpretable—and there are distinct bi-interpretable theories extending $\mathrm {ZFC}^{-}$. Similarly, using a construction of Mathias, we prove that every model of ZF is bi-interpretable with a model of Zermelo set theory in which the replacement axiom fails. (shrink)

We give an example of two ordered structures $\mathcal {M},\mathcal {N}$ in the same language $\mathcal {L}$ with the same universe, the same order and admitting the same one-variable definable subsets such that $\mathcal {M}$ is a model of the common theory of o-minimal $\mathcal {L}$ -structures and $\mathcal {N}$ admits a definable, closed, bounded, and discrete subset and a definable injective self-mapping of that subset which is not surjective. This answers negatively two question by Schoutens; the first being whether (...) there is an axiomatization of the common theory of o-minimal structures in a given language by conditions on one-variable definable sets alone. The second being whether definable completeness and type completeness imply the pigeonhole principle. It also partially answers a question by Fornasiero asking whether definable completeness of an expansion of a real closed field implies the pigeonhole principle. (shrink)

We show that if M is a countable transitive model of $\text {ZF}$ and if $a,b$ are reals not in M, then there is a G generic over M such that $b \in L[a,G]$. We then present several applications such as the following: if J is any countable transitive model of $\text {ZFC}$ and $M \not \subseteq J$ is another countable transitive model of $\text {ZFC}$ of the same ordinal height $\alpha $, then there is a forcing extension N of (...) J such that $M \cup N$ is not included in any transitive model of $\text {ZFC}$ of height $\alpha $. Also, assuming $0^{\#}$ exists, letting S be the set of reals generic over L, although S is disjoint from the Turing cone above $0^{\#}$, we have that for any non-constructible real a, $\{ a \oplus s : s \in S \}$ is cofinal in the Turing degrees. (shrink)

A problem is a multivalued function from a set of instances to a set of solutions. We consider only instances and solutions coded by sets of integers. A problem admits preservation of some computability-theoretic weakness property if every computable instance of the problem admits a solution relative to which the property holds. For example, cone avoidance is the ability, given a noncomputable set A and a computable instance of a problem ${\mathsf {P}}$, to find a solution relative to which A (...) is still noncomputable.In this article, we compare relativized versions of computability-theoretic notions of preservation which have been studied in reverse mathematics, and prove that the ones which were not already separated by natural statements in the literature actually coincide. In particular, we prove that it is equivalent to admit avoidance of one cone, of $\omega $ cones, of one hyperimmunity or of one non- $\Sigma ^{0}_1$ definition. We also prove that the hierarchies of preservation of hyperimmunity and non- $\Sigma ^{0}_1$ definitions coincide. On the other hand, none of these notions coincide in a nonrelativized setting. (shrink)

Recent work in computability theory has focused on various notions of asymptotic computability, which capture the idea of a set being “almost computable.” One potentially upsetting result is that all four notions of asymptotic computability admit “almost computable” sets in every Turing degree via coding tricks, contradicting the notion that “almost computable” sets should be computationally close to the computable sets. In response, Astor introduced the notion of intrinsic density: a set has defined intrinsic density if its image under any (...) computable permutation has the same asymptotic density. Furthermore, introduced various notions of intrinsic computation in which the standard coding tricks cannot be used to embed intrinsically computable sets in every Turing degree. Our goal is to study the sets which are intrinsically small, i.e. those that have intrinsic density zero. We begin by studying which computable functions preserve intrinsic smallness. We also show that intrinsic smallness and hyperimmunity are computationally independent notions of smallness, i.e. any hyperimmune degree contains a Turing-equivalent hyperimmune set which is “as large as possible” and therefore not intrinsically small. Our discussion concludes by relativizing the notion of intrinsic smallness and discussing intrinsic computability as it relates to our study of intrinsic smallness. (shrink)

We show that a $$ -simplified morass can be added by a forcing with working parts of size smaller than $\kappa $. This answers affirmatively the question, asked independently by Shelah and Velleman in the early 1990s, of whether it is possible to do so.Our argument use a modification of a technique of Mitchell’s for adding objects of size $\omega _2$ in which collections of models – all of equal, countable size – are used as side conditions. In our modification, (...) whilst the individual models are, as in Mitchell’s technique, taken ad hoc from quite general classes, the collections of models are very highly structured, in a way that is somewhat different from, perhaps more stringent than, Mitchell’s original, arguably making the method more wieldy and giving the prospect of further uses with more delicate working parts. (shrink)

We define a weak iterability notion that is sufficient for a number of arguments concerning $\Sigma _{1}$ -definability at uncountable regular cardinals. In particular we give its exact consistency strength first in terms of the second uniform indiscernible for bounded subsets of $\kappa $ : $u_2$, and secondly to give the consistency strength of a property of Lücke’s.TheoremThe following are equiconsistent:There exists $\kappa $ which is stably measurable;for some cardinal $\kappa $, $u_2=\sigma $ ;The $\boldsymbol {\Sigma }_{1}$ -club property holds (...) at a cardinal $\kappa $.Here $\sigma $ is the height of the smallest $M \prec _{\Sigma _{1}} H $ containing $\kappa +1$ and all of $H $. Let $\Phi $ be the assertion: TheoremAssume $\kappa $ is stably measurable. Then $\Phi $.And a form of converse:TheoremSuppose there is no sharp for an inner model with a strong cardinal. Then in the core model K we have: $\mbox {``}\exists \kappa \Phi \mbox {''}$ is -generically absolute ${\,\longleftrightarrow \,}$ There are arbitrarily large stably measurable cardinals.When $u_2 < \sigma $ we give some results on inner model reflection. (shrink)

The following bare-bones story introduces the idea of a cumulative hierarchy of pure sets: 'Sets are arranged in stages. Every set is found at some stage. At any stage S: for any sets found before S, we find a set whose members are exactly those sets. We find nothing else at S.' Surprisingly, this story already guarantees that the sets are arranged in well-ordered levels, and suffices for quasi-categoricity. I show this by presenting Level Theory, a simplification of set theories (...) due to Scott, Montague, Derrick, and Potter. (shrink)

Potentialists think that the concept of set is importantly modal. Using tensed language as an heuristic, the following bar-bones story introduces the idea of a potential hierarchy of sets: 'Always: for any sets that existed, there is a set whose members are exactly those sets; there are no other sets.' Surprisingly, this story already guarantees well-foundedness and persistence. Moreover, if we assume that time is linear, the ensuing modal set theory is almost definitionally equivalent with non-modal set theories; specifically, with (...) Level Theory, as developed in Part 1. (shrink)

We introduce a novel set-intersection operator called ‘most-intersection’ based on the logical quantifier ‘most’, via natural density of countable sets, to be used in determining the majority chara...

Lewis Carroll, both logician and writer, suggested a logical paradox containing furthermore two connotations (connotations or metaphors are inherent in literature rather than in mathematics or logics). The paradox itself refers to implication demonstrating that an intermediate implication can be always inserted in an implication therefore postponing its ultimate conclusion for the next step and those insertions can be iteratively and indefinitely added ad lib, as if ad infinitum. Both connotations clear up links due to the shared formal structure with (...) other well-known mathematical observations: (1) the paradox of Achilles and the Turtle; (2) the transitivity of the relation of equality. Analogically to (1), one can juxtapose the paradox of the Liar (for Lewis Carroll’s paradox) and that of the arrow (for “Achilles and the Turtle”), i.e. a logical paradox, on the one hand, and an aporia of motion, on the other hand, suggesting a shared formal structure of both, which can be called “ontological”, on which basis “motion” studied by physics and “conclusion” studied by logic can be unified being able to bridge logic and physics philosophically in a Hegelian manner: even more, the bridge can be continued to mathematics in virtue of (2), which forces the equality (for its property of transitivity) of any two quantities to be postponed analogically ad lib and ad infinitum. The paper shows that Hilbert arithmetic underlies naturally Lewis Carroll’s paradox admitting at least three interpretations linked to each other by it: mathematical, physical and logical. Thus, it can be considered as both generalization and solution of his paradox therefore naturally unifying the completeness of quantum mechanics (i.e. the absence of hidden variables) and eventual completeness of mathematics as the same and isomorphic to the completeness of propositional logic in relation to set theory as a first-order logic (in the sense of Gödel (1930)’s completeness theorems). (shrink)

We study reflection principles in Kelley-Morse set theory with urelements (KMU). We first show that First-Order Reflection Principle is not provable in KMU with Global Choice. We then show that KMU + Limitation of Size + Second-Order Reflection Principle is mutually interpretable with KM + Second-Order Reflection Principle. Furthermore, these two theories are also shown to be bi-interpretable with parameters. Finally, assuming the existence of a κ+-supercompact cardinal κ in KMU, we construct a model of KMU + Second-Order Reflection Principle (...) where Limitation of Size fails. (shrink)

In this paper I apply the concept of _inter-Model Inconsistency in Set Theory_ (MIST), introduced by Carolin Antos (this volume), to select positions in the current universe-multiverse debate in philosophy of set theory: I reinterpret H. Woodin’s _Ultimate L_, J. D. Hamkins’ multiverse, S.-D. Friedman’s hyperuniverse and the algebraic multiverse as normative strategies to deal with the situation of de facto inconsistency toleration in set theory as described by MIST. In particular, my aim is to situate these positions on the (...) spectrum from inconsistency avoidance to inconsistency toleration. By doing so, I connect a debate in philosophy of set theory with a debate in philosophy of science about the role of inconsistencies in the natural sciences. While there are important differences, like the lack of threatening explosive inferences, I show how specific philosophical positions in the philosophy of set theory can be interpreted as reactions to a state of inconsistency similar to analogous reactions studied in the philosophy of science literature. My hope is that this transfer operation from philosophy of science to mathematics sheds a new light on the current discussion in philosophy of set theory; and that it can help to bring philosophy of mathematics and philosophy of science closer together. (shrink)

For an arbitrary forcing class Γ, the Γ-fragment of Todorčević’s strong reflection principle SRPis isolated in such a way that the forcing axiom for Γ implies the Γ-fragment of SRP, the sta...

We investigate the behavior of cardinal characteristics of the reals under extensions that do not add new <κ-sequences. As an application, we show that consistently the followi...

A definable pair of disjoint non-OD sets of reals exists in the Sacks and ????0-large generic extensions of the constructible universe L. More specifically, if a∈2ω is eith...

The infinite pigeonhole principle for 2-partitions asserts the existence, for every set A, of an infinite subset of A or of its complement. In this paper, we study the infinite pigeonhole pr...

Based on a pre-order on a set, we axiomatize the Egli-Milner order on the power set and show how it is related to the Lewis order. Moreover, we consider a strict version of the Egli-Milner order and show how it can be related to the semantics of conditionals based on a priority structure.

The question “what is an interpretation?” is often intertwined with the perhaps even harder question “what is a scientific theory?”. Given this proximity, we try to clarify the first question to acquire some ground for the latter. The quarrel between the syntactic and semantic conceptions of scientific theories occupied a large part of the scenario of the philosophy of science in the 20th century. For many authors, one of the two currents needed to be victorious. We endorse that such debate, (...) at least in the terms commonly expressed, can be misleading. We argue that the traditional notion of “interpretation” within the syntax/semantic debate is not the same as that of the debate concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics. As much as the term is the same, the term “interpretation” as employed in quantum mechanics has its meaning beyond (pure) logic. Our main focus here lies on the formal aspects of the solutions to the measurement problem. There are many versions of quantum theory, many of them incompatible with each other. In order to encompass a wider variety of approaches to quantum theory, we propose a different one with an emphasis on pure formalism. This perspective has the intent of elucidating the role of each so-called “interpretation” of quantum mechanics, as well as the precise origin of the need to interpret it. (shrink)

A common argument in support of a beginning of the universe used by advocates of the kalām cosmological argument (KCA) is the argument against the possibility of an actual infinite, or the “Infinity Argument”. However, it turns out that the Infinity Argument loses some of its force when compared with the achievements of set theory and it brings into question the view that God predetermined an endless future. We therefore defend a new formal argument, based on the nature of time (...) (just as geometrical reasoning is based on the nature of space), which addresses more directly the question of beginningless time. (shrink)

David Kaplan observed in Kaplan that the principle \\) cannot be verified at a world in a standard possible worlds model for a quantified bimodal propositional language. This raises a puzzle for certain interpretations of the operator Q: it seems that some proposition p is such that is not possible to query p, and p alone. On the other hand, Arthur Prior had observed in Prior that on pain of contradiction, ∀p is Q only if one true proposition is Q (...) and one false proposition is Q. The two observations are related: ∀p is elusive in that it is not possible for the proposition to be uniquely Q. Kaplan based his model-theoretic observation on Cantor’s theorem, but there is a less well-known link between this simple set-theoretic observation and Prior’s remark. We generalize the link to develop a heuristic designed to move from Cantor’s theorem to the observation that a variety of sentences of the bimodal language express propositions that cannot be Q uniquely. We highlight the analogy between some of these results and some set-theoretic antinomies and suggest that the phenomenon is richer than one may have anticipated. (shrink)

We define a new type of “shatter function” for set systems that satisfies a Sauer–Shelah type dichotomy, but whose polynomial-growth case is governed by Shelah’s two-rank instead of VC dimension. We identify the least exponent bounding the rate of growth of the shatter function, the quantity analogous to VC density, with Shelah’s $\omega $ -rank.

We introduce three families of diagonal reflection principles for matrices of stationary sets of ordinals. We analyze both their relationships among themselves and their relationships with other known principles of simultaneous stationary reflection, the strong reflection principle, and the existence of square sequences.

We show that recurrence conditions do not yield invariant Borel probability measures in the descriptive set-theoretic milieu, in the strong sense that if a Borel action of a locally compact Polish group on a standard Borel space satisfies such a condition but does not have an orbit supporting an invariant Borel probability measure, then there is an invariant Borel set on which the action satisfies the condition but does not have an invariant Borel probability measure.

We investigate the uniform computational content of the open and clopen Ramsey theorems in the Weihrauch lattice. While they are known to be equivalent to $\mathrm {ATR_0}$ from the point of view of reverse mathematics, there is not a canonical way to phrase them as multivalued functions. We identify eight different multivalued functions and study their degree from the point of view of Weihrauch, strong Weihrauch, and arithmetic Weihrauch reducibility. In particular one of our functions turns out to be strictly (...) stronger than any previously studied multivalued functions arising from statements around $\mathrm {ATR}_0$. (shrink)

It is widely agreed that the intelligibility of modal metaphysics has been vindicated. Quine's arguments to the contrary supposedly confused analyticity with metaphysical necessity, and rigid with non-rigid designators.2 But even if modal metaphysics is intelligible, it could be misconceived. It could be that metaphysical necessity is not absolute necessity – the strictest real notion of necessity – and that no proposition of traditional metaphysical interest is necessary in every real sense. If there were nothing otherwise “uniquely metaphysically significant” about (...) metaphysical necessity, then paradigmatic metaphysical necessities would be necessary in one sense of “necessary”, not necessary in another, and that would be it. The question of whether they were necessary simpliciter would be like the question of whether the Parallel Postulate is true simpliciter – understood as a pure mathematical conjecture, rather than as a hypothesis about physical spacetime. In a sense, the latter question has no objective answer. In this article, I argue that paradigmatic questions of modal metaphysics are like the Parallel Postulate question. I then discuss the deflationary ramifications of this argument. I conclude with an alternative conception of the space of possibility. According to this conception, there is no objective boundary between possibility and impossibility. Along the way, I sketch an analogy between modal metaphysics and set theory. (shrink)

Answering one of the main questions of [S.-D. Friedman, T. Hyttinen and V. Kulikov, Generalized descriptive set theory and classification theory, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 230 80, Chap. 7]...

We present a case study for the debate between the American and the Australian plans, analyzing a crucial aspect of negation: expressivity within a theory. We discuss the case of non-classical set theories, presenting three different negations and testing their expressivity within algebra-valued structures for ZF-like set theories. We end by proposing a minimal definitional account of negation, inspired by the algebraic framework discussed.

We introduce the class of unshreddable theories, which contains the simple and NIP theories, and prove that such theories have exactly saturated models in singular cardinals, satisfying certain set-theoretic hypotheses. We also give criteria for a theory to have singular compactness.

The status of independent statements is the main problem in the philosophy of set theory. We address this problem by presenting the perspective of a practising set theorist. We thus give an authentic insight in the current state of thinking in set-theoretic practice, which is to a large extent determined by independence results. During several meetings, the second author asked the first author about the development of forcing, the use of new axioms and set-theoretic intuition on independence. Parts of these (...) conversations are directly presented in this article. They are supplemented by important mathematical results as well as discussion sections. Finally, we present three hypotheses about set-theoretic practice: First, that most set theorists were surprised by the introduction of the forcing method. Second, that most set theorists think that forcing is a natural part of contemporary set theory. Third, that most set theorists prefer an answer to a problem with the help of a new axiom of lowest possible consistency strength, and that for most set theorists, a difference in consistency strength weighs much more than the difference between Forcing Axiom and Large Cardinal Axiom. (shrink)

In many ontological debates there is a familiar challenge. Consider a debate over X s. The “small” or anti-X side tries to show that they can paraphrase the pro-X or “big” side’s claims without any loss of expressive power. Typically though, when the big side adds whatever resources the small side used in their paraphrase, the symmetry breaks down. The big side plus small’s resources is a more expressively powerful and thus more theoretically fruitful theory. In this paper, I show (...) that there is a very general solution to this problem, for the small side. Assuming the resources of set theory, small can successfully paraphrase big. This result depends on a theorem about models of set theory with urelements. After proving this theorem, I discuss some of its philosophical ramifications. (shrink)

In the thesis some combinatorial statements are analysed from the reverse mathematics point of view. Reverse mathematics is a research program, which dates back to the Seventies, interested in finding the exact strength, measured in terms of set-existence axioms, of theorems from ordinary non set-theoretic mathematics. After a brief introduction to the subject, an on-line (incremental) algorithm to transitively reorient infinite pseudo-transitive oriented graphs is defined. This implies that a theorem of Ghouila-Houri is provable in RCA_0 and hence is computably (...) true. Interval graphs and interval orders are the common theme of the second part of the thesis. A chapter is devoted to analyse the relative strength of different characterisations of countable interval graphs and to study the interplay between countable interval graphs and countable interval orders. In this context the theme of unique orderability of interval graphs arises, which is studied in the following chapter. The last chapter about interval orders inspects the strength of some statements involving the dimension of countable interval orders. The third part is devoted to the analysis of two theorems proved by Rival and Sands in 1980. The first principle states that each infinite graph contains an infinite subgraph such that each vertex of the graph is adjacent either to none, or to one or to infinitely many vertices of the subgraph. This statement, restricted to countable graphs, is proved to be equivalent to ACA_0 and hence to be stronger than Ramsey's theorem for pairs, despite the similarity of partial order with finite width contains an infinite chain such that each point of the poset is comparable either to none or to infinitely many points of the chain. For each k less than or equal to 3, the latter principle restricted to countable poset of width k is proved to be equivalent to ADS. Some complementary results are presented in the thesis. (shrink)

We give an exposition of the compactness of L(QcfC), for any set C of regular cardinals.

In many different ontological debates, anti-arbitrariness considerations push one towards two opposing extremes. For example, in debates about mereology, one may be pushed towards a maximal ontology (mereological universalism) or a minimal ontology (mereological nihilism), because any intermediate view seems objectionably arbitrary. However, it is usually thought that anti-arbitrariness considerations on their own cannot decide between these maximal or minimal views. I will argue that this is a mistake. Anti-arbitrariness arguments may be used to motivate a certain popular thesis in (...) the philosophy of mathematics that rules out the maximalist view in many different ontological debates. (shrink)

Let $\mathcal M=$ be a linearly ordered first-order structure and T its complete theory. We investigate conditions for T that could guarantee that $\mathcal M$ is not much more complex than some colored orders. Motivated by Rubin’s work [5], we label three conditions expressing properties of types of T and/or automorphisms of models of T. We prove several results which indicate the “geometric” simplicity of definable sets in models of theories satisfying these conditions. For example, we prove that the strongest (...) condition characterizes, up to definitional equivalence, theories of colored orders expanded by equivalence relations with convex classes. (shrink)

Penelope Maddy’s Second Philosophy is one of the most well-known ap- proaches in recent philosophy of mathematics. She applies her second-philosophical method to analyze mathematical methodology by reconstructing historical cases in a setting of means-ends relations. However, outside of Maddy’s own work, this kind of methodological analysis has not yet been extensively used and analyzed. In the present work, we will make a first step in this direction. We develop a general framework that allows us to clarify the procedure and (...) aims of the Second Philosopher’s investigation into set-theoretic methodology; pro- vides a platform to analyze the Second Philosopher’s methods themselves; and can be applied to further questions in the philosophy of set theory. (shrink)