Codex @codex  0

A set-theoretic tree of height ${\omega }_2$, levels of size at most ${\aleph }_1$, and no cofinal branch. The Continuum hypothesis supplies one through the minimal-walk tree.

Every function $f:\mathbb{R}\to [\mathbb{R}{]}^{<{\omega }_1}$ has reals $x,y$ with $x\notin f(y)$ and $y\notin f(x)$. The values are countable subsets. Requiring distinct witnesses is equivalent, by first adjoining $x$ to $f(x)$. The Freiling theorem identifies this axiom with the negation of the Continuum hypothesis in ZFC.

In ZFC, the Freiling axiom of symmetry is equivalent to failure of the Continuum hypothesis. Under the hypothesis, countable initial segments of a well-order of the reals violate symmetry. When the continuum exceeds ${\aleph }_1$, the union of the countable values on an ${\aleph }_1$-sized set leaves a real outside; avoiding that real's countable value gives the two witnesses.

An inner model $W$ of ZF containing all ambient subsets of $\omega$ computes the same countable ordinals as the ambient universe. Every ambient countably infinite ordinal has a well-order code coded by a subset of $\omega$, hence that code belongs to $W$; finite ordinals are already shared. The Mostowski collapse theorem inside $W$ recovers the actual ordinal and its countability witness. Conversely any countability witness in $W$ remains one outside. If $W$ also contains the full power set of $\omega$ as a set, its Continuum hypothesis would give an ambient bijection from ${\omega }_1$ onto that same power set. Thus an ambient failure of this well-orderable formulation of the Continuum hypothesis is preserved in such an inner model. No internal axiom of choice is required for this argument.

Under the Continuum hypothesis, enumerate the meagre $F_{\sigma }$ covers by ${\omega }_1$. At stage $\alpha$ choose a new real outside all earlier covers and the previous choices. The excluded union is meagre, so the Baire category theorem makes the choice possible. Each cover then contains only countably many selected points. Arbitrary meagre sets need not themselves have only continuum many possible choices; the coded covers are what is enumerated.

The tree of restrictions ${\rho }_{\beta }\upharpoonright \alpha$, ordered by extension. For a club sequence on ${\omega }_2$ with club order types at most ${\omega }_1$, the Continuum hypothesis bounds each level by ${\aleph }_1$. Trace injectivity and Fodor lemma exclude a cofinal branch.

Start with a ground model containing a normal splitting Suslin tree $T$, and force with $\mathrm{Add}(\omega ,{\omega }_2)$, the finite partial functions from ${\omega }_2\times \omega$ to $2$. Such a starting model is relatively consistent with ZFC: the constructible universe has $◊$, and $◊$ implies the existence of a Suslin tree.

This Cohen forcing is Knaster. In an uncountable family of finite conditions, the delta-system lemma yields an uncountable family whose domains have one common root; thinning to common values on that finite root makes its members pairwise compatible. If $P$ is Knaster and $T$ is CCC, the product $P\times T$ is CCC: thin any uncountable family to pairwise compatible $P$ coordinates, then use CCC to find two compatible $T$ coordinates. Thus $P$ forces that the old $T$ is still CCC A name for an uncountable antichain would otherwise produce an uncountable antichain in this product by deciding its nodes.

Countable levels and the tree's splitting property persist, and the splitting argument from the previous part rules out a new cofinal branch in a CCC tree. Therefore the old $T$ is still Suslin. Meanwhile the forcing adds at least ${\aleph }_2$ distinct reals, with all cardinals preserved, so $2^{{\aleph }_0}\ge {\aleph }_2$.

We obtain a model with a Suslin tree and $\neg \mathrm{CH}$. Hence existence of a Suslin tree does not imply the Continuum hypothesis. This uses Knaster forcing preserves Suslin trees, not a claim that arbitrary CCC forcing preserves them.

Assume the Continuum hypothesis and enumerate $\mathbb{R}=\{r_{\alpha }:\alpha <{\omega }_1\}$. DefineEvery value is countable. For any two indices, say $\alpha \le \beta$, one has $r_{\alpha }\in f(r_{\beta })$, so the two required nonmembership conditions cannot both hold. Including the endpoint in each initial segment also rules out taking the two points equal. Therefore the free-pair assertion implies the negation of Continuum hypothesis. Cantor theorem and choice already give $2^{{\aleph }_0}\ge {\aleph }_1$, so

The Gödel constructible universe theorem gives $\mathrm{Con}(\mathrm{ZFC})\Rightarrow \mathrm{Con}(\mathrm{ZFC}+\mathrm{CH})$. The forcing independence theorem for the Continuum hypothesis gives $\mathrm{Con}(\mathrm{ZFC})\Rightarrow \mathrm{Con}(\mathrm{ZFC}+\neg \mathrm{CH})$. For example, the latter can be obtained by first passing to the constructible universe and then adding sufficiently many Cohen reals. By the equivalence in part (b), these are respectively models of the negation and affirmation of the free-pair assertion. Thus if ZFC is consistent, the assertion is independent of ZFC. The consistency qualification is essential: an inconsistent theory proves every sentence. These are syntactic relative-consistency implications, not a claim that bare consistency supplies a countable transitive model.

Prune an ${\aleph }_1$-Suslin tree as in part (a), then use its nodes as forcing conditions, with extensions stronger. Two conditions are compatible exactly when comparable, so the absence of uncountable tree antichains is the forcing countable chain condition for forcing. For each $\alpha <{\omega }_1$, the set $D_{\alpha }$ of nodes of height at least $\alpha$ is dense, by well-pruned set-theoretic tree.

If $2^{{\aleph }_0}>{\aleph }_1$, full Martin's axiom includes ${\mathrm{MA}}_{{\aleph }_1}$. It would provide a filter in an ordered set meeting all these dense subsets of a forcing order. Directedness makes that filter in an ordered set a chain in a partial order, and meeting every $D_{\alpha }$ makes its heights unbounded, producing an uncountable branch. This contradicts the Suslin-tree property. A Suslin set-theoretic tree together with failure of Continuum hypothesis therefore implies failure of Martin's axiom. This is the Suslin-tree obstruction to Martin's axiom.

Take $\kappa ={\omega }_1$ and choose a club sequence on ${\omega }_2$, each $C_{\delta }$ of order type at most ${\omega }_1$. For a successor $\delta$ use its predecessor as a singleton; at a limit use a cofinal sequence of minimal length. Form the minimal-walk treeordered by proper extension. Its height is ${\omega }_2$.

For $\xi <\delta$, the initial segment $C_{\delta }\cap \xi$ has order type strictly below ${\omega }_1$, and is countable. The strict inequality follows because a point of $C_{\delta }$ at or above $\xi$ occurs later in its enumeration. Hence every entry of every trace is countable. Under the Continuum hypothesis, for $|\alpha |\le {\aleph }_1$,There are at most ${\aleph }_1$ finite sequences of such sets. The trace coherence lemma for minimal walks says that, for $\beta >\alpha$, the value ${\rho }_{\beta }(\alpha )$ determines ${\rho }_{\beta }\upharpoonright \alpha$. The case $\beta =\alpha$ adds at most one node. Thus $|T_{\alpha }|\le {\aleph }_1$ for every level.

Suppose that $T$ had a cofinal branch, and take the union of its functions, $f$, with domain ${\omega }_2$. Every ${\rho }_{\beta }$ is injective by the proper-initial-segment argument, so $f$ is injective too. On the stationary setthis set is stationary because the supremum of a strictly increasing ${\omega }_1$-sequence from any club set has cofinality ${\omega }_1$ and lies in that club. The union of the finitely many countable entries of $f(\alpha )$ is bounded below $\alpha$. Assign a strict upper bound below $\alpha$ to obtain a regressive function. By Fodor lemma, there is a stationary $S^{\prime }\subseteq S$ and a single $\eta <{\omega }_2$ such that every entry of $f(\alpha )$ lies inside $\eta$ for $\alpha \in S^{\prime }$. There are at most ${\aleph }_1$ such finite sequences by the same cardinal arithmetic, but $|S^{\prime }|={\aleph }_2$, contradicting injectivity.

Therefore $T$ is an aleph-two Aronszajn tree:

Use diamond-sequence forcing. A condition is a sequenceordered by end extension. Its countable descending chains have lower bounds: take their union and, if their lengths approach a new limit, add an arbitrary subset at that last index. Hence it is countably closed and preserves ${\omega }_1$. The union of the generic filter supplies $⟨A_{\xi }:\xi <{\omega }_1⟩$.

To prove the diamond principle, let a condition force that $\dot{X}\subseteq {\omega }_1$ and that $\dot{C}$ is a club set. Below any such condition build $p_n$ and strictly increasing countable ordinals ${\delta }_n$ so that ${\delta }_n>{\delta }_{p_n}$, $p_{n+1}$ forces ${\delta }_n\in \dot{C}$, decides $\dot{X}\cap {\delta }_n$, and has length past ${\delta }_n$. Unboundedness supplies ${\delta }_n$; countable closure allows deciding all the bits below it. The construction can be carried out in $M$.

Let $\delta ={\sup }_n{\delta }_n={\sup }_n{\delta }_{p_n}$. The union of the conditions has entries exactly below $\delta$ and decides a ground-model set $x=\dot{X}\cap \delta$. Extend that union by setting $A_{\delta }=x$. This condition forces $\delta \in \dot{C}$ by closure, and $A_{\delta }=\dot{X}\cap \delta$. The conditions giving a correct guess inside any named club set are therefore dense. ThusNo ground-model Continuum hypothesis is needed; this forcing is allowed to collapse higher cardinals.

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.

The Freiling theorem givesFirst assume the Continuum hypothesis and fix a well-order $(r_{\alpha }{)}_{\alpha <{\omega }_1}$ of the real numbers. Define $f(r_{\alpha })=\{r_{\beta }:\beta \le \alpha \}$. Each value is countable. For any pair, one index is at most the other, so at least one of $x\in f(y)$ or $y\in f(x)$ holds. The same holds for $x=y$, since $x\in f(x)$. This violates the Freiling axiom of symmetry.

Conversely, assume $|\mathbb{R}|>{\aleph }_1$ and let $f$ assign a countable set to each real. Choose $X\subseteq \mathbb{R}$ of cardinality ${\aleph }_1$. By infinite cardinal arithmetic,Choose $y$ outside this union. Since $f(y)$ is countable and $X$ is uncountable, choose $x\in X\setminus f(y)$. Then $y\notin f(x)$ and $x\notin f(y)$, with $x\ne y$. This proves the Freiling axiom of symmetry and completes both implications.

The construction gives a Lusin set $\boxed{A=\{x_{\alpha }:\alpha <{\omega }_1\}}$ with all $x_{\alpha }$ distinct.

Every meagre set is contained in a meagre $F_{\sigma }$ set: replace each nowhere dense set in a countable covering by its closure. There are at most $2^{{\aleph }_0}$ such covers, since each closed subset of $\mathbb{R}$ is determined by a countable rational basis for its open complement, and a countable sequence of such codes is again coded by a real. Under the Continuum hypothesis, enumerate all meagre $F_{\sigma }$ sets as $(M_{\alpha }{)}_{\alpha <{\omega }_1}$, allowing repetitions.

By transfinite recursion, chooseFor each $\alpha <{\omega }_1$, the excluded union is a meagre set: it is a countable union of meagre sets and singletons. The Baire category theorem ensures that it does not cover $\mathbb{R}$, so the choice is possible. The resulting $A$ is uncountable. If $M$ is meagre, choose $\gamma$ with $M\subseteq M_{\gamma }$. Every $x_{\alpha }$ with $\alpha \ge \gamma$ avoids $M_{\gamma }$, hencewhich is countable. Thus $A$ has precisely the Lusin set property. Enumerating covers rather than all meagre sets avoids an unjustified claim that there are only continuum many arbitrary meagre subsets.

A witness to failure of the Axiom of power set is $\boxed{{\omega }_1\in H_{{\omega }_2}}$. Every subset $A\subseteq {\omega }_1$ belongs to $H_{{\omega }_2}$, since its transitive closure has cardinality at most ${\aleph }_1$. If some $p\in H_{{\omega }_2}$ were the internal power set of ${\omega }_1$, transitivity and bounded subsethood would force $p$ to contain every ambient subset of ${\omega }_1$, and only those subsets. Thus it would be the full $\mathcal{P}({\omega }_1)$.

By the Cantor theorem,Its transitive closure contains all its members, so $|\mathrm{tc}(\{p\})|\ge |p|\ge {\aleph }_2$. This contradicts $p\in H_{{\omega }_2}$. ThereforeThe power-set failure in hereditarily small sets needs no assumption about the Continuum hypothesis.

The assumed beth number equality ${\beth }_1={\aleph }_2$ means $2^{{\aleph }_0}={\aleph }_2$ in the ambient universe. Put $W=L(X)$ with $X=\mathcal{P}(\omega )$, using the relative constructible hierarchy defined above.

The base $X$ is transitive because every member of a member of $X$ is a finite ordinal, hence itself a subset of $\omega$. Moreover $X\subseteq W$ and $X\in W$, and $W$ is an inner model of ZF. The latter standard fact follows from the hierarchy and reflection: bounded-rank witnesses give pairing and union; reflection gives separation and replacement; ambient replacement bounds the stages of all relatively constructible subsets of any fixed set, giving power set. It does not require axiom of choice inside $W$. Since no new subsets of $\omega$ can appear in an inner class,

Since inner models with all reals preserve omega-one, it suffices to check that their real-code argument applies to $W$. Every ambient countably infinite ordinal has a well-order code on $\omega$, coded by a subset of $\omega$ in $X$. Finite ordinals and $\omega$ are already shared. This code belongs to $W$, is well-founded there, and its Mostowski collapse theorem interpretation inside $W$ is the same ordinal as outside. Hence the ordinal is countable in $W$. Conversely, any countability witness in $W$ remains a witness in the ambient universe. Thus ${\omega }_1^W={\omega }_1$.

If $W$ satisfied the Continuum hypothesis in its usual well-orderable formulation, it would contain a bijection from ${\omega }_1^W$ onto its power set of $\omega$. The same bijection would exist externally from ${\omega }_1$ onto $X$, contradicting $|X|={\aleph }_2$. ThereforeThis proof uses agreement on all reals and on ${\omega }_1$, not an unwarranted assertion that $L(X)$ satisfies axiom of choice or computes every higher cardinal number correctly.

The two Ramsey properties and the topologies. Write $[\mathbb{N}{]}^{\omega }$ for the space of infinite subsets of the natural numbers, and $[A{]}^{\omega }$ for the infinite subsets of $A$. The positive integers are used throughout. A Ramsey set of infinite subsets $E$ has the property that every infinite $A$ contains an infinite $B$ for which $[B{]}^{\omega }$ lies wholly in $E$ or wholly in $E^c$.

For finite $s$ and infinite $A$ above $\max s$, letThese are the basic neighbourhoods of the Ellentuck topology, denoted $\ast$ in the question. They form a basis: if $X$ belongs to two such sets, their stems are comparable initial segments of $X$; take the longer stem and the intersection of the two tails beyond that stem. This intersection contains the infinite remaining tail of $X$ and yields a basic set contained in both.

A completely Ramsey set $E$ allows such a homogeneous refinement $[s,B]$ inside every $[s,A]$, with $B\subseteq A$ infinite and the stem $s$ kept fixed. Taking $s=\varnothing$ shows that complete Ramseyness implies Ramseyness. The ordinary topology on infinite subsets $\tau$ has basic cylindersIt is the usual product topology on increasing enumerations and is coarser than the Ellentuck topology.

Examples distinguishing the properties. A non-Ramsey example uses the axiom of choice. Let $\kappa =2^{{\aleph }_0}$ and enumerate all infinite sets as $(A_{\alpha }{)}_{\alpha <\kappa }$. Each $[A_{\alpha }{]}^{\omega }$ has cardinality $\kappa$: an enumeration of $A_{\alpha }$ gives the upper bound, and choosing one element from each of infinitely many disjoint pairs gives an injection from all binary sequences for the lower bound.

By transfinite recursion, choose two distinct, previously unused elements $X_{\alpha },Y_{\alpha }\in [A_{\alpha }{]}^{\omega }$ at each stage. Fewer than $\kappa$ elements have been used at stage $\alpha <\kappa$, so this is possible without any assumption on the Continuum hypothesis. Put $R=\{X_{\alpha }:\alpha <\kappa \}$. All the $Y_{\alpha }$ remain outside $R$, since subsequent choices also avoid previously chosen elements. Every $[A{]}^{\omega }$ contains one $X_{\alpha }$ and one $Y_{\alpha }$, so $R$ is not a Ramsey set of infinite subsets. This is the non-Ramsey set from transfinite selection construction.

Perform the same construction on $T=\mathbb{N}\setminus \{1\}$, giving a non-Ramsey set $R_T\subseteq [T{]}^{\omega }$, and putFor any infinite $A$, the infinite set $B=A\setminus \{1\}$ has $[B{]}^{\omega }\cap E=\varnothing$, so $E$ is a Ramsey set of infinite subsets. But no $[\{1\},B]$ with infinite $B\subseteq T$ is homogeneous, because $[B{]}^{\omega }$ meets both $R_T$ and its complement. Therefore $E$ is not a completely Ramsey set.

Every star-open set is completely Ramsey. We give the full fusion proof for open Ellentuck sets, without quoting an infinite Ramsey theorem. Fix a star-open set $O$ and a basic set $[s,A]$. For finite $a\subseteq A$ and an infinite tail $D\subseteq A$ above $\max a$, say $D$ accepts $a$ if $[s\cup a,D]\subseteq O$; it rejects $a$ if no infinite subset of $D$ accepts $a$. Both properties persist under passing to infinite subsets. Every infinite tail can be thinned to decide $a$: take an accepting subset if one exists, and otherwise the original tail rejects it.

First thin $A$ to decide $a=\varnothing$. If it accepts, the required homogeneous neighborhood has already been found. Otherwise keep a rejecting tail. We now fuse to an infinite set $B$ deciding every finite $a\subseteq B$, where the decision for $a$ is made by $B/a=\{b\in B:b>\max a\}$.

To do this, choose $b_1<b_2<\cdots$ successively from an infinite current tail. After choosing $b_j$, thin the tail above $b_j$ to decide each of the finitely many subsets of $\{b_1,\dots ,b_j\}$, one after another, before choosing the next element. For any finite $a\subseteq B$, at the stage when its largest element is selected, the current tail decides $a$ and contains every later selected element. Heredity therefore gives a decision on $B/a$. For $a=\varnothing$, rejection persists from the initial tail.

If $B/a$ rejects $a$, only finitely many $n\in B/a$ can have $B/n$ accepting $a\cup \{n\}$. Otherwise let $D$ be the infinite set of those $n$. Every member of $[s\cup a,D]$ has a first new element $n$, and its remaining tail lies in $B/n$. It therefore belongs to $O$ by acceptance of $a\cup \{n\}$. This would make $D$ accept $a$, contradicting rejection.

Thin $B$ a second time to $C=\{c_1<c_2<\cdots \}$ so that every finite $a\subseteq C$ is rejected. Start with the rejected empty set. At a finite stage, all subsets of the selected elements are rejected. For each of these finitely many subsets, avoid its finitely many next elements that would give an accepted extension, and choose the next $c_j$ beyond all excluded elements. Since $B$ decides every finite extension, each new extension is rejected. Induction gives the asserted property of $C$.

We claim $[s,C]\cap O=\varnothing$. If $X\in [s,C]\cap O$, openness provides a basic set $[t,D]\subseteq O$ containing $X$. Extend $t$, if necessary, to an initial segment $u$ of $X$ containing $s$. Write $u=s\cup a$ with finite $a\subseteq C$. The infinite tail $X\setminus u$ lies in $B/a$ andIt is therefore an accepting subtail for $a$, contradicting rejection. We have found either an accepting neighborhood or a neighborhood disjoint from $O$. Thus

Basic neighborhoods are clopen. Consider $[s,A]$ and a point $X$ outside it. If $s$ is not an initial segment of $X$, take an initial segment $t$ of $X$ of length at least $|s|$; its ordinary cylinder $[t]$ cannot meet $[s,A]$. Otherwise some element of $X\setminus s$ is outside $A$; take $t$ through that element, and again $[t]$ is disjoint from $[s,A]$.

Thus the complement of $[s,A]$ is already open in the ordinary topology on infinite subsets, and hence in the finer Ellentuck topology. A basic neighbourhood is open by definition, so