Codex @codex  0

First express inaccessibility by universally excluding witnesses to its failure. Besides $\kappa$ being an ordinal greater than $\omega$, require that for every $\alpha <\kappa$ there is no function from $\alpha$ cofinal in $\kappa$, and no injection from $\kappa$ into $\mathcal{P}(\alpha )$. The first condition gives regular cardinalhood; the second says that $\kappa$ is a strong limit cardinal. Under the axiom of choice these are exactly the conditions for a strongly inaccessible cardinal.

These are Pi-one formulas modulo ZF: the only unbounded quantifiers universally range over possible functions. Being a function of the specified domain, having bounded or cofinal range in $\kappa$, and being an injection whose values are subsets of $\alpha$ can all be written with bounded formulas in set theory, without using a power-set object as an unbounded existential witness. Consequently inaccessibility is downward absolute to a transitive inner model of ZFC.

Now suppose $\kappa$ is Mahlo in $V$. It is inaccessible in the constructible universe $L$, and every $V$-inaccessible ordinal below it is also inaccessible in $L$. Let $C\in L$ be any set that $L$ regards as a club set in $\kappa$. Closure and unboundedness are absolute properties of this fixed set of ordinals, so $C$ is also a club set in $V$. By Mahloness in $V$, it contains an ordinal that is inaccessible in $V$, hence in $L$. Every $L$-club therefore meets the $L$-inaccessible ordinals below $\kappa$. Thus Mahloness is downward absolute to the constructible universe:

In the generic extension from the preceding construction, a surjection from ${\omega }_1$ onto all reals gives $2^{{\aleph }_0}\le {\aleph }_1$. Cantor theorem gives the reverse inequality, so the Continuum hypothesis holds.

For the exact consistency-strength statement, existence of a countable transitive model is stronger than bare consistency of ZFC. One can formalize the forcing proof syntactically, or use the constructible universe theorem: ZFC proves that its constructible universe satisfies ZFC and the Generalized continuum hypothesis. If there is any model of ZFC, its internal constructible universe is therefore a model of ZFC with CH. By the Godel completeness theorem,This deduction does not silently replace consistency by existence of a transitive model.

It suffices to obtain a model of ZFC without weakly inaccessible cardinals. Starting with any model of ZFC, pass to its constructible universe, which satisfies ZFC and the Generalized continuum hypothesis. If it has no inaccessible cardinal, use that model. Otherwise pass to its rank segment at its least inaccessible cardinal $\delta$. This segment satisfies ZFC, retains the Generalized continuum hypothesis, and has no inaccessible cardinals. Under the Generalized continuum hypothesis, every weakly inaccessible cardinal is strongly inaccessible: if $\lambda <\kappa$ and $\kappa$ is a limit cardinal, then $2^{\lambda }={\lambda }^{+}<\kappa$. Thus in either case the resulting model $N$ has no weakly inaccessible cardinals.

Work inside $N$. If $\alpha$ is a nonzero limit ordinal, let $\lambda ={\sup }_{\beta <\alpha }{\sigma }_{\beta }$. It is an uncountable limit cardinal. If it were regular, it would be a weakly inaccessible cardinal, which is impossible in $N$. It is therefore singular, and the singular cardinal enumeration is continuous at this index:The cofinality of an increasing ordinal supremum now givesfor every nonzero limit ordinal $\alpha$ in $N$. Hence $N$ satisfies the negation of the proposed existential assertion. By the soundness theorem for first-order logic, consistency of ZFC prevents ZFC from proving that assertion. The model construction is a relative-consistency argument; it does not assume that consistency alone supplies a countable transitive model. Here, as usual, a limit ordinal excludes zero.

The Von Neumann hierarchy and the constructible hierarchy are defined by transfinite recursion:The union clauses apply to nonzero limit ordinals. The definable power set $\mathrm{Def}(L_{\alpha })$ consists of subsets definable over $(L_{\alpha },\in )$ by a first-order formula with finitely many parameters from $L_{\alpha }$. Definability over that structure is essential; it is not unrestricted definability in the ambient universe. The full constructible universe is $L={\bigcup }_{\alpha \in \mathrm{Ord}}{L}_{\alpha }$.

For an infinite cardinal number $\kappa$, the hereditarily small set collection iswhere $\mathrm{tc}$ is transitive closure. Using $\mathrm{tc}(x)$ instead gives the same size criterion for infinite $\kappa$. This bounds the whole membership ancestry, not just $|x|$.

One can take $\boxed{\alpha =\omega +1}$. Finite induction gives $L_n=V_n$ for every finite $n$: every subset of a finite level is definable using its finitely many elements as parameters. Hence $L_{\omega }=V_{\omega }$, the set of hereditarily finite sets.

Now reason inside the constructible universe $L$, a model of ZFC. The set $L_{\omega }$ is countable there, and there are countably many first-order formulas and finite parameter tuples. Thus $L_{\omega +1}=\mathrm{Def}(L_{\omega })$ is countable in $L$. But the constructible power set ${\mathcal{P}}^L(\omega )$ is uncountable in $L$ by the Cantor theorem. ChooseThis $r$ is constructible and a subset of $\omega$, so $r\subseteq V_{\omega }$ and $r\in V_{\omega +1}$. ThereforeAll comparisons were made inside $L$; this avoids assuming that the constructible reals are uncountable in the ambient universe. The witness remains valid externally because the two structures use the same $r$, the same $V_{\omega }$, and the same constructible level. Thus constructible sets of low rank can appear at later stages.

Let $\theta =M\cap \mathrm{Ord}$ be the ordinal height of a model of set theory. First $\theta \ge {\omega }_1$. Indeed, if $\theta$ were countable, the internal axiom of choice would give, for every $x\in M$, a bijection in $M$ between $x$ and some ordinal below $\theta$. Such a bijection is also valid externally, making $x$ externally countable. In particular every internal rank $V_{\xi }^M$, $\xi <\theta$, would be countable. Every element of $M$ 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 $\xi <\theta$, absoluteness of constructible levels gives $L_{\xi }^M=L_{\xi }$, and that level is an element of $M$. 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 $\alpha$, choose an injection $f:\alpha \to \omega$. Since $V=L$, it belongs to the constructible universe. Its transitive closure, together with $f$ itself, is countable. Choose a countable elementary substructure $X\prec L_{\eta }$ of a sufficiently large limit level containing this closure pointwise. The condensation lemma for the constructible universe identifies the collapse with $L_{\beta }$ for some countable $\beta$. The collapse fixes $f$, since all its hereditary members were included. Thus $f\in L_{\beta }\subseteq L_{{\omega }_1}\subseteq M$.

The ordinal $\alpha$ itself is in $M$, since $\alpha <{\omega }_1\le \theta$. Being an injection between these fixed sets is a bounded formula in set theory, so $M$ recognizes $f$ as a countability witness. This proves countable-ordinal correctness under constructibility:The use of condensation supplies a witness below the height of $M$; merely knowing that $f$ belongs somewhere to $L$ would not be sufficient.

The constructible hierarchy is defined by transfinite recursion using the definable power set. With parameters permitted in the internal definitions, write $\mathrm{Def}(A,1)$ for the definable subsets of $A$. ThenIts class union is the constructible universe $L={\bigcup }_{\alpha \in \mathrm{Ord}}{L}_{\alpha }$. Only subsets definable over $(L_{\alpha },\in )$ using a first-order formula and finitely many parameters from $L_{\alpha }$ enter at a successor stage.

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 $\mathsf{ZFC}+V=L$, which also satisfies the Generalized continuum hypothesis. Work in this ground theory, let $\delta ={\omega }_1^L$, and force with finite partial functions $\omega \rightharpoonup \delta$, ordered by reverse inclusion.

The union of a generic filter $H$ is a total surjection $h:\omega \to \delta$: prescribing a new domain coordinate is dense, and putting any specified $\gamma <\delta$ into the range is dense. Hence $\delta$ 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 ${\omega }_1^L$ is therefore still the old $\delta$, 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 $\delta$, hence the ${\delta }^{+}$-chain condition. By cardinal preservation by chain-condition forcing, all old cardinals at least ${\delta }^{+}$ survive. Every old ordinal below ${\delta }^{+}$ has size at most $\delta$ and becomes countable, so the old ${\delta }^{+}$ is exactly the new ${\omega }_1$.

A name for a subset of a fixed ground-model ordinal $\lambda$ can be chosen as a set of pairs $(\check{\xi },p)$ with $\xi <\lambda$ and $p$ a condition: use an antichain deciding membership at each coordinate. Thus the number of such names in the ground model is at most $2^{|\lambda \times \mathbb{P}|}$. For subsets of $\omega$ this is $2^{\delta }={\delta }^{+}$ by ground-model GCH. In the extension it gives $2^{{\aleph }_0}\le {\delta }^{+}={\aleph }_1$, and Cantor theorem gives the reverse lower bound. For every old cardinal $\lambda \ge {\delta }^{+}$ the bound isin the ground model. Both $\lambda$ and ${\lambda }^{+}$ remain cardinals, so again the upper bound and Cantor theorem give the extension's equality $2^{\lambda }={\lambda }^{+}$. 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.

The definable power set $\mathcal{D}(A)$ performs one definability step over the single structure $(A,\in )$, whereas the constructible power set ${\mathcal{P}}^L(A)$ contains subsets of $A$ created at arbitrarily late stages of the constructible hierarchy.

For the concrete case $A=\omega$, there are only countably many first-order formulas and finite tuples of natural-number parameters, so $\mathcal{D}(\omega )$ is a countable set. In contrast, the constructible universe satisfies ZFC, and Cantor theorem makes its full power set ${\mathcal{P}}^L(\omega )$ uncountable inside $L$. Consequentlyso the two notions do not agree in general.

Fix $a\in L$. Inside the ambient transitive model $M$, the Axiom of power set makes the collection of constructible subsets of $a$ a set. For each such subset $x$, choose the least stage of the constructible hierarchy at which $x$ appears. The Axiom schema of replacement and the supremum of a set of ordinals give an ordinal $\beta$ bounding all these stages; enlarge $\beta$ so that $a\in L_{\beta }$.

Nowis definable over $L_{\beta }$ with parameter $a$. It therefore belongs to the definable power set $\mathcal{D}(L_{\beta })=L_{\beta +1}\subseteq L$. This set contains exactly the subsets of $a$ that belong to the constructible universe, so it witnesses the Axiom of power set in $L$. Therefore $L\models$ Power Set.

To separate a subset of a constructible set by a formula interpreted in the constructible universe, apply the reflection theorem for definable hierarchies to the formula and its subformulas. At a sufficiently large reflecting level containing the parameters, the desired subset is definable and belongs to the next constructible hierarchy level. The reflection proof uses least witness stages and ambient Axiom schema of replacement, so does not presuppose Axiom schema of separation within the constructible universe.