Let $M \subseteq N$ be countable transitive ZFC set models. Assume that this extension preserves cardinals, i.e. if $\alpha$ is an ordinal number (this notion is absolute) such that $(\alpha \text{ is a cardinal})^M$, then also $(\alpha \text{ is a cardinal})^N$. Notice that the other direction holds in any case.

Now I think that for every ordinal $\alpha$ we have $\aleph_\alpha^M = \aleph_\alpha^N$. The proof uses induction by $\alpha$. The case $\alpha=0$ follows since $\omega$ is absolute. The successor step uses the assumption. The limit step uses that $\sup$ is absolute. Can someone confirm this sketch of proof?

Background: In Kunen's Set theory this seems to be used in the context of Cohen forcing. I wonder why it isn't mentioned explicitly.

  • $\begingroup$ I think you are assuming that the set of ordinals of $M$ and of $N$ are the same, and in the second paragraph you mean for every ordinal $\alpha \in M.$ This of course is the case when $N$ is a forcing extension of $M.$ I suspect Kunen doesn't mention it because he thought it obvious, although it might be mentioned in one of the exercises in Chapter 7. $\endgroup$ – DanielWainfleet Jun 16 '16 at 4:10

Yes, you can see this in a slightly more explicit way:

Consider $\kappa$ which is a cardinal in $M$ and $N$, then $A_M=\{\beta<\kappa\mid M\models\omega\leq\beta,\beta\text{ is a cardinal}\}$, and $A_N$ defined similarly, are the same by the induction hypothesis. If the two sets are the same, their order type is the same, and it is clear that $\kappa=(\aleph_{\operatorname{otp}(A_X)})^X$ for $X\in\{M,N\}$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.