Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/0009240

A simple maximality principle

Joel David Hamkins
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

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 phi holding in some forcing extension V^P and all subsequent extensions V^P*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 (diamond box phi) implies (box phi), and is equivalent to the modal theory S5. In this article, I prove that the Maximality Principle is relatively consistent with ZFC. A boldface version of the Maximality Principle, obtained by allowing real parameters to appear in phi, is equiconsistent with the scheme asserting that V_delta is an elementary substructure of V for an inaccessible cardinal delta, which in turn is equiconsistent with the scheme asserting that ORD is Mahlo. The strongest principle along these lines is the Necessary Maximality Principle, which asserts that the boldface MP holds in V and all forcing extensions. From this, it follows that 0# exists, that x# exists for every set x, that projective truth is invariant by forcing, that Woodin cardinals are consistent and much more. Many open questions remain.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joel David Hamkins. 2000-09-28. A simple maximality principle. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0009240

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Bluebirds and mockingbirds cannot produce a fixed-point combinator

Let $B$ be the bluebird combinator with reduction rule $Bxyz \to_{w} x\left(yz\right)$, let $M$ be the mockingbird combinator with reduction rule $Mx \to_{w} xx$, and let $I$ be the identity bird combinator with reduction rule $Ix \to_{w} x$. A fixed-point combinator, called a sage bird by Smullyan, is a closed term $Y$ such that, for a fresh variable $x$, $Yx$ is equivalent to $x\left(Yx\right)$ under these reduction rules. For a fixed variable $x$, we construct an invariant $\mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(u\right)$ of a $BMI$-term $u$ with respect to $\to_{w}$. This invariant traces the occurrences of $x$ in the leftmost-innermost reduction sequence of $u$. We then prove that $\mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(Yx\right) \neq \mathrm{Tr}_{x}\left(x^{r}\left( Yx \right)\right)$ for every $x$-free $BMI$-term $Y$ and every $r\geq 1$. Consequently, there exists no fixed-point combinator in $BMI$-combinatory logic. This provides a negative answer to the problem posed by Smullyan in 1985.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Pointwise provable equality and the failure of composition

Montagna (1989) and Di Paola--Montagna (1991) claim that the algebraic systems $S'$ and $S'_T$, respectively, are categories. We show that the proposed composition is not independent of the choice of representatives. For every consistent recursively enumerable extension $T$ of Peano arithmetic ($\mathrm{PA}$), we exhibit two program indices that are pointwise provably equal in $T$ but yield inequivalent composites when each is run after the same program. Montagna's $S'$ is the case $T=\mathrm{PA}$. The failure already occurs for partial maps from $ω$ to itself. Weak totality and the proposed range assignment also depend on the choice of representatives. More generally, for consistent $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$, pointwise provable equality is a composition congruence exactly when $T$ proves every true $Π^0_1$ sentence, in which case it is extensional equality. This completeness condition fails for every consistent recursively enumerable $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$ by Gödel's second incompleteness theorem. For every extension $T\supseteq\mathrm{PA}$, the least composition congruence containing pointwise provable equality is extensional equality if $T$ is $Σ^0_1$-sound and the universal relation otherwise.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Compactness via Consistency Properties

We will use consistency properties to characterize strongly compact cardinals, first showing an adequate Model Existence Theorem for larger fragments.

math.LO↗