Abstract
We can reformulate the generalized continuum problem as: for regular κ<λ we have λ to the power κ is λ, We argue that the reasonable reformulation of the generalized continuum hypothesis, considering the known independence results, is “for most pairs κ<λ of regular cardinals, λ to the revised power of κ is equal to λ”. What is the revised power? λ to the revised power of κ is the minimal cardinality of a family of subsets of λ each of cardinality κ such that any other subset of λ of cardinality κ is included in the union of strictly less than κ members of the family. We still have to say what “for most” means. The interpretation we choose is: for every λ, for every large enoughK < ℶ w . Under this reinterpretation, we prove the Generalized Continuum Hypothesis.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
[AAC90] D. L. Alben, G. L. Alexanderson and C. Reid (eds.),More Mathematical People, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990.
[Br] F. E. Browder (ed.),Mathematical developments arising from Hilbert’s Problems, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics28 (1974), 421.
[FW] M. Foreman and H. Woodin,The generalized continuum hypothesis can fail everywhere, Annals of Mathematics133 (1991), 1–36.
[GiSh 344] M. Gitik and S. Shelah,On certain, destructibility of strong cardinals and a question of Hajnal, Archive for Mathematical Logic28 (1989), 35–42.
[Gre] J. Gregory,Higher Souslin trees and the generalized continuum hypothesis, Journal of Symbolic Logic41 (1976), 663–671.
[HJSh 249] A. Hajnal, I. Juhász, and S. ShelahSplitting strongly almost disjoint families, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society295 (1986), 369–387.
[HLSh 162] B. Hart, C. Laflamme, and S. Shelah,Models with second order properties, V: A General principle, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic64 (1993), 169–194.
[LaPiRo] M. C. Laskowski, A. Pillay, and P. Rothmaler,Tiny models of categorical theories, Archive for Mathematical Logic31 (1992), 385–396.
[Sh:E12] S. Shelah,Analytical Guide and Corrections to [Sh:g],
[Sh 575] S. Shelah,Cellularity of free products of Boolean algebras (or topologies), Fundamenta Mathematica, to appear.
[Sh 668] S. Shelah,On Arhangelskii’s Problem, e-preprint.
[Sh 666] S. Shelah,On what I do not understand (and have something to say) I, Fundamenta Mathematica, to appear.
[Sh 513] S. Shelah,PCF and infinite free subsets, Archive for Mathematical Logic, to appear.
[Sh 589] S. Shelah,PCF theory: applications, Journal of Symbolic Logic, to appear.
[Sh 108] S. Shelah,On successors of singular cardinals, inLogic Colloquium ’78 (Mons, 1978), Vol. 97 ofStudies in Logic Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland, Amsterdam-New York, 1979, pp. 357–380.
[Sh 82] S. Shelah,Models with second order properties. III. Omitting types for L(Q), Archiv für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagenforschung21 (1981), 1–11.
[Sh 351] S. Shelah,Reflecting stationary sets and successors of singular cardinals, Archive for Mathematical Logic31 (1991), 25–53.
[Sh 400a] S. Shelah,Cardinal arithmetic for skeptics, American Mathematical Society. Bulletin. New Series26 (1992), 197–210.
[Sh 420] S. Shelah,Advances in cardinal arithmetic, inFinite and Infinite Combinatorics in Sets and Logic (N.W. Sauer et al., eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1993, pp. 355–383.
[Sh 410] S. Shelah,More on cardinal arithmetic, Archive for Mathematical Logic32 (1993), 399–428.
[Sh:g] S. Shelah,Cardinal Arithmetic, Vol. 29 ofOxford Logic Guides, Oxford University Press, 1994.
[Sh 454a] S. Shelah,Cardinalities of topologies with small base, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic68 (1994), 95–113.
[Sh 430] S. Shelah,Further cardinal arithmetic, Israel Journal of Mathematics95 (1996), 61–114.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Partially supported by the Israeli Basic Research Fund and the BSF. The author wishes to thank Alice Leonhardt for the beautiful typing. Publication No. 460
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shelah, S. The generalized continuum hypothesis revisited. Isr. J. Math. 116, 285–321 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02773223
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02773223