Assuming , every uncountable transitive model of ZFC contains all ambient countable ordinals and witnesses their countability internally. Its ordinal height is at least , and absoluteness of constructible levels puts inside it. Every countability witness for a countable ordinal can be chosen in by hereditarily countable constructible sets appear below omega-one.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2018 iii Paper 121 2 iii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
Let be the ordinal height of a model of set theory. First . Indeed, if were countable, the internal axiom of choice would give, for every , a bijection in between and some ordinal below . Such a bijection is also valid externally, making externally countable. In particular every internal rank , , would be countable. Every element of lies in one of these internal ranks, sowould be a countable union of countable sets, a contradiction. This is why an uncountable transitive set model has uncountable ordinal height.
For , absoluteness of constructible levels gives , and that level is an element of . The reason is that satisfaction in a fixed set structure uses the same domain and finite formulas in both universes, so successor definitions agree; transfinite recursion then also makes limit stages agree. Transitivity consequently givesIt remains to locate a countability witness. Given an ambient countable ordinal , choose an injection . Since , it belongs to the constructible universe. Its transitive closure, together with itself, is countable. Choose a countable elementary substructure of a sufficiently large limit level containing this closure pointwise. The condensation lemma for the constructible universe identifies the collapse with for some countable . The collapse fixes , since all its hereditary members were included. Thus .
The ordinal itself is in , since . Being an injection between these fixed sets is a bounded formula in set theory, so recognizes as a countability witness. This proves countable-ordinal correctness under constructibility:The use of condensation supplies a witness below the height of ; merely knowing that belongs somewhere to would not be sufficient.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2018 iii Paper 121 2 iv Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
We give a relative-consistency argument using a finite-function collapse to countable size. The assumed consistency implies that ZFC is consistent. Passing to the constructible universe gives consistency of , which also satisfies the Generalized continuum hypothesis. Work in this ground theory, let , and force with finite partial functions , ordered by reverse inclusion.
The union of a generic filter is a total surjection : prescribing a new domain coordinate is dense, and putting any specified into the range is dense. Hence becomes countable. Set forcing preserves ordinals, and absoluteness of constructible levels implies that the extension has the same constructible universe as the ground model. Its is therefore still the old , so it satisfies the stated countability of constructible omega-one condition.
We must also verify GCH after the collapse. The order has ground-model size , hence the -chain condition. By cardinal preservation by chain-condition forcing, all old cardinals at least survive. Every old ordinal below has size at most and becomes countable, so the old is exactly the new .
A name for a subset of a fixed ground-model ordinal can be chosen as a set of pairs with and a condition: use an antichain deciding membership at each coordinate. Thus the number of such names in the ground model is at most . For subsets of this is by ground-model GCH. In the extension it gives , and Cantor theorem gives the reverse lower bound. For every old cardinal the bound isin the ground model. Both and remain cardinals, so again the upper bound and Cantor theorem give the extension's equality . These are all its uncountable cardinals. This proves GCH preservation by a finite-function collapse in the required case.
The forcing relative-consistency theorem now yieldsThe construction in fact only needs consistency of ZFC. This argument uses the formal inner-model and forcing consistency theorems; it does not infer the existence of a countable transitive model merely from consistency.