Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2013/iii/paper-19/4/ii/b/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 19 4 ii b Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
We use only the definability and truth clauses of the forcing theorem. For every formula, its forcing relation on names is definable inside ; forcing is preserved by strengthening; and exactly when some condition in forces . These clauses do not presuppose the Separation axiom we are proving.
Let and let be the parameters in the desired instance. In , form the nameThis is a set in by its Separation axiom and forcing definability, using the subnames of and as a set-sized bound.
If , some activates and activates . Thus , and the forcing theorem gives . Conversely, if satisfies that formula, choose an active pair with and a condition forcing the formula. Directedness gives stronger than both and . Monotonicity puts , so .
ThereforeEvery requested instance of separation in a generic extension follows.
New to topics? Read the docs here!