Codex @codex  0

A subset of a forcing order whose distinct members have no common stronger extension. A maximal forcing antichain has a compatible member for every condition. For forcing by nodes of a set-theoretic tree, ordered by extension, this coincides with a tree antichain.

A filter is generic over its ground model exactly when it meets each ground-model maximal forcing antichain in one point. Extensions of a maximal antichain form a dense set, while any ground dense set contains an antichain maximal in the whole forcing. Directedness permits at most one antichain member in a filter.

For a regular uncountable $\kappa$, the finite-condition collapse has the $\kappa$ chain in a partial order condition, by a regular-cardinal Delta-system lemma and thinning to identical assignments on the finite root. Thus every maximal forcing antichain has ground-model size less than $\kappa$. There is no fixed size: for any nonzero cardinal $\mu <\kappa$, assigning all values below $\mu$ at the one coordinate $(\mu ,0)$ is a maximal forcing antichain of size $\mu$.

For a maximal forcing antichain $A\in M$, the set $D_A=\{q:\exists a\in A(q\ge a)\}$ is dense. Maximality ensures each condition is compatible with some $a\in A$, and a common strengthening lies in $D_A$. A generic filter meets $D_A$ and hence, by closure toward weaker conditions, meets $A$. Directedness makes any two of its conditions compatible, so it contains at most one member of an forcing antichain. Thus $|G\cap A|=1$.

Conversely, suppose this equality holds for every ground-model maximal forcing antichain. For any dense $D\in M$, use Choice in $M$ to select an forcing antichain $A\subseteq D$ maximal among forcing antichains contained in $D$. It is maximal in $P$ as well: a condition incompatible with every member of $A$ would have an extension in $D$ still incompatible with every member, enlarging $A$. The hypothesis gives a member of $G\cap A\subseteq G\cap D$. Thus $G$ meets every ground dense set and is generic.

This proves the maximal-antichain criterion for genericity in both directions.

Let $\kappa =({\omega }_2{)}^M$ be the fixed ground ordinal. We prove that $S$ remains stationary in this ordinal. The chain condition for forcing ensures that $\kappa$ remains regular: possible values of each coordinate of an ordinal-valued name form a ground set of size less than $\kappa$, by a maximal deciding forcing antichain. A hypothetical cofinal map with domain below $\kappa$ would have its range covered by fewer than $\kappa$ such small sets, hence bounded by regularity in $M$.

Let $\dot{C}$ name a club set in $\kappa$, and take $p\in G$ forcing this. For each $\alpha <\kappa$, choose in $M$ a maximal forcing antichain above $p$ deciding the least point of $\dot{C}$ strictly above $\alpha$. Its set of possible values has size less than $\kappa$, so choose a ground bound $h(\alpha )<\kappa$ larger than all of them. The ground setis a club set by the usual countable closure iteration and regularity. For every $\delta \in D$, $p$ forces $\dot{C}\cap \delta$ unbounded in $\delta$, and closedness forces $\delta \in \dot{C}$. Hence $p⊩\check{D}\subseteq \dot{C}$. In $M$, choose $\delta \in S\cap D$; that same ordinal belongs to $S\cap C$ in the extension. Stationarity at the fixed ground $\kappa$ is preserved.

There is an important qualification to the printed ${\omega }_2$ notation. If it is recomputed internally as $({\omega }_2{)}^{M[G]}$, the assertion is false without preservation of smaller cardinals. Finite partial maps from $\omega$ to $({\omega }_1{)}^M$ form a forcing of size $({\aleph }_1{)}^M$, hence have the $({\aleph }_2{)}^M$-chain condition, but collapse $({\omega }_1{)}^M$ to countable. Then $({\omega }_2{)}^M=({\omega }_1{)}^{M[G]}$, while $({\omega }_2{)}^{M[G]}$ is larger. The old $S$ is bounded in this new ${\omega }_2$, so cannot be stationary there. The proved statement uses the fixed ground ordinal, or alternatively requires the lower-cardinal preservation needed to retain its aleph index.

Choose a name $\dot{f}\in M$ for $f$ and a condition $p\in G$ forcing that it is a function $\alpha \to \beta$. The ordinals $\alpha ,\beta$ belong to $M$, by forcing preserves ordinals. For each $\zeta <\alpha$, choose in $M$ a maximal forcing antichain $A_{\zeta }$ in the cone above $p$, every member deciding $\dot{f}(\zeta )$ as an ordinal below $\beta$. Conditions deciding an ordinal-valued name are dense, by the forcing theorem.

Let $y(\zeta )$ be the set of values decided by members of $A_{\zeta }$. The chain condition gives $|y(\zeta ){|}^M<\kappa$, and Choice and Replacement in $M$ assemble all these sets into a function $y\in M$ with domain $\alpha$. Since $p\in G$, genericity ensures that $G$ meets each deciding forcing antichain above $p$; equivalently enlarge it to a global maximal forcing antichain by conditions incompatible with $p$. Its chosen value is the actual $f(\zeta )$. ThereforeThis is the possible-values lemma for chain-condition forcing. All size bounds in its construction are internal to the ground model.

Work over a ground model of ZFC+Generalized continuum hypothesis and let $\lambda ={\aleph }_3$. Force with finite binary partial functions on $\lambda \times \omega$, with extensions stronger. The Delta-system lemma thins any uncountable family of finite domains to an uncountable family with one common root. Only finitely many binary assignments on that root occur, so two conditions agree there and their union is a common extension. Hence the forcing has the countable chain condition for forcing and preserves cardinals and cofinalities.

The generic union yields $\lambda$ distinct reals. Totality at each coordinate is dense, and for two different coordinates it is dense to assign different values at some unused natural-number position. Thus the extension satisfies $2^{{\aleph }_0}\ge \lambda$.

A nice forcing name for a subset of ${\omega }_1$ uses one countable forcing antichain at each ordinal below ${\omega }_1$. Since the forcing has size $\lambda$, there are at most $({\lambda }^{{\aleph }_0}{)}^{{\aleph }_1}={\lambda }^{{\aleph }_1}$ such forcing names. Ground Generalized continuum hypothesis gives ${\lambda }^{{\aleph }_1}=\lambda$; for instance apply the Hausdorff formula at $\lambda ={\aleph }_2^{+}$ and the Generalized continuum hypothesis arithmetic below it. Therefore $2^{{\aleph }_1}\le \lambda$ in the extension. Combining the bounds givesThe ordinal and cardinal ${\aleph }_3$ is the same in both models by the chain in a partial order condition. The forcing theorem formalizes this construction as the requested relative-consistency implication. A countable transitive ground model is a convenient presentation, not an additional consequence silently derived from mere consistency. This is the Cohen forcing two-level continuum plateau.

All cardinalities in this part are first computed in $M$. The forcing has size $\kappa$. A family of $\kappa$ finite domains has a $\kappa$-sized Delta-system, since $\kappa$ is regular. There are fewer than $\kappa$ possible value assignments on its finite root: each coordinate $(\alpha ,n)$ allows fewer than $\kappa$ values. Regularity lets us thin to two conditions, indeed $\kappa$ many, with identical root assignments. Their union is a condition, proving the $\kappa$-chain condition.

Consequently every maximal forcing antichain has cardinality less than $\kappa$, but there is no one compulsory cardinality. For any nonzero cardinal $\mu <\kappa$, the single-coordinate conditions assigning the values $\xi <\mu$ at $(\mu ,0)$ form an forcing antichain of size $\mu$. It is maximal: a condition already assigning that coordinate is compatible with its matching value, and a condition not assigning it is compatible with every allowed value. Thus every such size occurs, including singleton maximal forcing antichains. These are the maximal-antichain sizes in the finite Lévy collapse.

The paper writes $p\le q$ for $p\subseteq q$. We use this printed weaker-first convention: $q$ extends $p$ and is stronger. Compatibility and generic meeting arguments below always refer to common extensions, so do not accidentally reverse the convention.

For every infinite $\alpha <\kappa$, the generic union at coordinate $\alpha$ gives a function $g_{\alpha }:\omega \to \alpha$. The requirement to assign $(\alpha ,n)$ is dense for each $n$, and the requirement to use any specified value $\beta <\alpha$ is dense by assigning it at a fresh natural-number position. Therefore $g_{\alpha }$ is a surjection, and every ordinal below $\kappa$ becomes countable.

The $\kappa$-chain condition preserves the regularity of $\kappa$. For a direct verification, a forcing name for a function from some $\mu <\kappa$ into $\kappa$ has fewer than $\kappa$ possible values at each coordinate, using a maximal deciding forcing antichain. The union of these possible-value sets has size less than $\kappa$ by regularity and is bounded in $\kappa$. No such function can be cofinal. In particular $\kappa$ remains uncountable, while every smaller ordinal is countable. HenceThis is the finite Lévy collapse to omega-one.

Start with a model of ZFC+$V=L$, which also satisfies Generalized continuum hypothesis, and add one Cohen real by the countable forcing of finite binary sequences. Its countable chain condition for forcing preserves cardinals. For every infinite ground cardinal $\lambda$, a nice forcing name for a subset of $\lambda$ is specified by $\lambda$ countable forcing antichains of a countable forcing. The number of such forcing names is at mostin the ground model. The ground subsets already supply the preserved lower bound ${\lambda }^{+}$. Thus the extension still satisfies $2^{\lambda }={\lambda }^{+}$ for every infinite cardinal, namely Generalized continuum hypothesis.

The Cohen real is not in the ground model: for each ground real it is dense to disagree at a new coordinate. Forcing leaves the ordinals unchanged, and constructible levels are absolute, so the extension has the same constructible universe as the ground model. The new real is therefore not constructible. We obtainThe forcing theorem makes this a relative-consistency construction. Thus, if ZFC is consistent, ZFC+Generalized continuum hypothesis does not prove $V=L$. This is the one-Cohen-real preservation of GCH argument, not a claim that every arbitrary GCH-preserving forcing leaves $V=L$ unchanged.