Forcing atom 2026-10-05
A condition is an atom if every two stronger conditions are compatible forcing conditions. This is a compatibility definition, not necessarily minimality in an arbitrary partial order. An atomless forcing order is one in which every condition has two incompatible strengthenings.
If a generic filter for an atomless forcing order belonged to its ground model, then the complement would be a dense ground-model set. A condition outside is already there; a condition in has two incompatible strengthenings, at least one outside its directed filter. Genericity would then require meeting the complement, a contradiction.
Suppose, towards a contradiction, that . Then is a ground-model set by axiom schema of separation. It is dense. If , it already lies in . If , atomless forcing order structure gives incompatible forcing conditions . Both cannot belong to the directed filter , so at least one is a strengthening of in .
All compatibility and extension quantifiers range over the same ground-model set , so this density argument is also valid internally in the transitive model . Genericity requires , contradicting the definition of . Therefore a generic filter for an atomless order is new:
The assumption is essential: a forcing atom determines a ground-model generic filter. For an atom , the conditions compatible with form a generic filter : two such conditions have strengthenings below , which have a common strengthening by the atom property; every dense set has a member below . In a general partial order, need not be the principal filter above .
The two-argument version of Fn forcing consists of finite partial functions:
Thus a stronger condition specifies more values. The empty partial function is the greatest condition. Two conditions are compatible forcing conditions exactly when they agree on their common domain; if they do, their set union is a common strengthening. This is in the three-argument convention for Fn forcing. If or is empty, only the empty condition exists. For infinite and at least two elements in , assigning two different values at a fresh coordinate proves that this is an atomless forcing order.
A forcing atom is a condition such that any two strengthenings of are compatible forcing conditions:
An atomless forcing order has no such condition; equivalently,
The meaning of is that there is no common stronger condition. For an arbitrary partial order, an atom need not be a minimal element: the definition concerns compatibility below it. This distinction prevents a minimal-element definition from misclassifying an order with descending but mutually compatible conditions.
The Rasiowa–Sikorski lemma constructs a generic filter over each . Every resulting generic extension remains a countable transitive model of ZFC: there are only countably many ground-model names externally. The order has the same elements and ordering at every stage, and atomless forcing order structure is absolute because all its quantifiers are bounded to . Hence the generic filter for an atomless order is new result gives for every .
The increasing union is transitive and contains . If it satisfied Axiom of power set for , there would be a set with
Choose with . The next-stage generic filter belongs to and is an actual subset of . This subset assertion is absolute for the transitive set , so . Transitivity of and then give , a contradiction. Thus the power-set failure in an increasing union of generic extensions occurs already at the fixed ground-model order:
The stages form an increasing chain, not an elementary chain, so the elementary chain theorem does not assert ZFC for their union.
Let for a fixed atomless forcing order , and . If a set were its internal power set of , choose with . The next generic filter belongs to , so ; transitivity of implies , contradicting generic filter for an atomless order is new. The chain is increasing but need not be an elementary chain.