**CUNY Graduate Center**

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Fridays 12:15pm-1:45pm**

**Organized by Victoria Gitman, Gunter Fuchs, and Arthur Apter**

**Calendar**

**May 19**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Miha Habič**
Bard College at Simon's Rock

**Some old and new results on nonamalgamable forcing extensions**

**Abstract**

Fixing some countable transitive model $M$ of set theory, we can consider its generic multiverse, the family of all models obtainable from $M$ by taking any sequence of forcing extensions and ground models. There is an attractive similarity between the generic multiverse and the Turing degrees, but the multiverse has the drawback (or feature?) that it contains nonamalgamable models, that is, models with no common upper bound, as was observed by several people, going back to at least Mostowski. In joint work with Hamkins, Klausner, Verner, and Williams in 2019, we studied the order-theoretic properties of the generic multiverse and, among other results, gave a characterization of which partial orders embed nicely into the multiverse. I will present our results in the simplest case of Cohen forcing, as well as existing generalizations to wide forcing, and some new results on non-Cohen ccc forcings.

**Video**

**May 5**

**10:00am** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Joel David Hamkins**
Notre Dame University

**Realizing Frege's Basic Law V, provably in ZFC**

**Abstract**

The standard set-theoretic distinction between sets and classes instantiates in important respects the Fregean distinction between objects and concepts, for in set theory we commonly take the universe of sets as a realm of objects to be considered under the guise of diverse concepts, the definable classes, each serving as a predicate on that domain of individuals. Although it is commonly held that in a very general manner, there can be no association of classes with objects in a way that fulfills Frege's Basic Law V, nevertheless, in the ZF framework, it turns out that we can provide a completely deflationary account of this and other Fregean abstraction principles. Namely, there is a mapping of classes to objects, definable in set theory in senses I shall explain (hence deflationary), associating every first-order parametrically definable class $F$ with a set object $\varepsilon F$, in such a way that Basic Law V is fulfilled:

$$\varepsilon F =\varepsilon G\leftrightarrow\forall x\, (Fx\leftrightarrow Gx).$$ Russell's elementary refutation of the general comprehension axiom, therefore, is improperly described as a refutation of Basic Law V itself, but rather refutes Basic Law V only when augmented with powerful class comprehension principles going strictly beyond ZF. The main result leads also to a proof of Tarski's theorem on the nondefinability of truth as a corollary to Russell's argument. A central goal of the project is to highlight the issue of definability and deflationism for the extension assignment problem at the core of Fregean abstraction.

**Video**

**April 28**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Will Boney**
Texas State University

**Building generalized indiscernibles in AECs with set theory**

**Abstract**

Generalized indiscernibles can be built in first-order theories by generalizing the combinatorial Ramsey’s Theorem to classes with more structure, which is an active area of study. Trying to do the same for infinitely theories (in the guise of Abstract Elementary Classes) requires generalizing the Erdos-Rado Theorem instead. We discuss various results about generalizations of the Erdos-Rado Theorem and techniques (including large cardinals and forcing) to build generalized indiscernible.

**Video**

**April 21**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Mohammad Golshani**
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences

**The proper forcing axiom for $\aleph_1$-sized posets and the continuum**

**Abstract**

We discuss Shelah's memory iteration technique and use it to show that the PFA for posets of size $\aleph_1$ is consistent with large continuum. This is joint work with David Aspero.

**Video**

**April 14**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Gabriel Goldberg**
University of California, Berkeley

**Cardinal preserving embeddings and strongly compact cardinals**

**Abstract**

Kunen's theorem that there is no elementary embedding from V to V seems to set an upper bound on the hierarchy of large cardinal axioms. Challenging this, Caicedo asked what happens when V is replaced with an inner model M that is very close to V in the sense that M correctly computes the class of cardinals. Assuming the existence of strongly compact cardinals, we show that there is no elementary embedding from such an inner model M into V or from V into M. The former result (M into V) is joint work with Sebastiano Thei. Without strong compactness assumptions, both questions remain open, but we'll discuss some partial results.

**Video**

**March 31**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Benjamin Goodman**
CUNY

**$\Sigma_n$-correct forcing axioms**

**Abstract**

The standard method of producing a model of a forcing axiom from a supercompact cardinal in fact gives a model of an even stronger principle: that for every small name a and every $\Sigma_2$ formula $arphi$ such that $\varphi(a)$ is forceable by and preserved under further forcing in our forcing class, there is a filter $F$ which meets a desired collection of dense sets and also interprets a such that $\varphi(a^F)$ already holds. I will show how to generalize this result to formulas of higher complexity by starting with slightly stronger large cardinal assumptions, then discuss the bounded versions of these enhanced forcing axioms, their relationships to other similar principles, and their consequences.

**Slides**

**Video**

**March 17**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Jonathan Osinski**
University of Hamburg

**Model-Theoretic Characterizations of Weak Vopěnka's Principle**

**Abstract**

It has been known since the 1980s that Vopěnka's Principle (VP) is equivalent to certain statements about logics, e.g. to the schema 'Every logic has a compactness cardinal.' On the other hand, it was only recently shown by Trevor Wilson that a related statement statement called Weak Vopěnka's Principle (WVP) is strictly weaker than VP. In fact, Joan Bagaria and Wilson showed that WVP is equivalent to the existence of $\Pi_n$-strong cardinals for all natural numbers $n$. We generalize logical characterizations of strong cardinals to achieve a characterization of $\Pi_n$-strong cardinals and therefore of WVP in terms of properties of strong logics. This is partly joint work with Will Boney and partly with Trevor Wilson.

**Video**

**March 10**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**James Holland**
Rutgers University

**Forcing more choice over the Chang model**

**Abstract**

The ordinal $\Theta$ has lots of interesting results in the context of $L(\mathbb R)$. Here, we try to find an analogue of $\Theta$ for the Chang model, and see what assumptions about it are natural. These assumptions come out of the process of forcing more dependent choice over the Chang model.

**Video**

**February 10**

**12:15pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Davide Leonessi**
CUNY

**Strategy and determinacy in infinite Hex**

**Abstract**

The popular game of Hex can be extended to the infinite hexagonal lattice, defining a winning condition which formalises the idea of a chain of colored stones stretching towards infinity. The descriptive-set-theoretic complexity of the set of winning positions is unknown, although it is at most Σ^1_1, and it is conjectured to be Borel; this has implications on whether games of infinite Hex are determined from all initial positions as either first-player wins or draws.

I will show that, unlike the finite game, infinite Hex with an initially empty board is a draw. But is the game still a draw when starting from a non-empty board? This open question can be partially answered in the positive by assuming the existence of certain local strategies, and in the negative by giving the advantage of placing two stones at each turn to one of the players. This is joint work with Joel David Hamkins.

**Video**

**February 3**

**12:30pm** NY time

**Virtual** (email Victoria Gitman for meeting id)

**Jing Zhang**
University of Toronto

**Highly connected Ramsey theory**

**Abstract**

A typical Ramsey statement is the following: given a coloring of a complete graph, we aim to find a 'large' complete subgraph that is monochromatic. The weaker variation we are considering here (introduced by Bergfalk-Hrusak-Shelah) is to relax the 'complete subgraph' in the goal. More precisely, we aim to find a certain 'large' connected monochromatic subgraph. We will discuss the motivation and the connections with other combinatorial and algebraic problems. We demonstrate consistently, such partition relations can hold at small uncountable cardinals like aleph_2, and successors of singular cardinals like aleph_{omega+1}. Joint work with Hrusak and Shelah.

**Video**

**Previous Semesters**