## List of PCF Hypotheses

November 17, 2011 at 11:09 | Posted in Uncategorized | 2 CommentsThis post represents a short detour. I want to take a look at the last section of the paper [Sh:420]: “Advances in Cardinal Arithmetic”. The published version of this paper is a bit hard to track down, but Shelah’s archive contains an approximation.

Anyway, the last section commences with a list of hypotheses:

- for every singular . (The “Shelah Strong Hypothesis” or (SSH).)
- If is a progressive set of regular cardinals, then .
- If is a progressive set of regular cardinals, then does not have a weakly inaccessible accumulation point.
- For every , is countable. (The “Shelah Weak Hypothesis” or (SWH).)
- For every , is countable.
- For every , is finite.

Are the above hypotheses true? Well, the first of these is the only one whose negation is known to be consistent (relative to large cardinals), so potentially any of the others could be a theorem of ZFC.

Edit: See James’s comment for news on (2).

How are they related? Shelah points out the following:

- (1) implies (2) implies (3)
- (1) implies (4) implies (5)
- (1) implies (6)
- (5) and (6) together imply (4)
- (4) implies (2)

I think I’d like to take a few posts to map out the proofs of the above, and maybe comment on what I know about the strength of the various hypotheses.

## 2 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

### Leave a Reply

Blog at WordPress.com.

Entries and comments feeds.

I was at a meeting in Singapore during the summer and I heard

Moti Gitik give a talk “On a certain PCF configuration” with a proof that (2) is

consistently false (from quite weak hypotheses, at the level of strong cardinals). I

saw him again in Bristol back in September and the proof was still standing.

Comment by James Cummings— November 17, 2011 #

Excellent, James! Thanks for the info!

Comment by Todd Eisworth— November 17, 2011 #