For an uncountable cardinal , this convention requires a cofinal branch in every separated rooted tree of height with fewer than immediate successors per node, without bounding level sizes. It is stronger than the usual tree property away from inaccessible cardinals. If , attach chains of cofinally increasing lengths below above fewer than children of one root; this contradicts the property. If for , take a binary tree through level , choose distinct nodes there, and attach to the th a chain of length . It has height , binary branching, and no cofinal branch. Hence the property implies that is a strongly inaccessible cardinal. At such a cardinal a separated tree with small immediate branching has small levels, so this convention agrees with the usual tree property. It is not the different notion called the strong tree property in modern set theory.
Let be strongly inaccessible cardinal in the ground model and perform the finite Lévy collapse to omega-one. The ground full binary set-theoretic tree of height has all levels of size less than , so these levels become countable. Its at least ground branches remain distinct. The chain in a partial order condition preserves , which is the extension . The unchanged ground set-theoretic tree therefore witnesses the Kurepa hypothesis.
Ordinal described by a first-order formula Created 2026-09-28 Updated 2026-10-05
A first-order formula describes an ordinal when is the least ordinal such that . No strongly inaccessible cardinal can be described: if , the Lévy reflection theorem produces some with .
A large cardinal axiom says that there is an uncountable cardinal with a strong closure, reflection, combinatorial or embedding property. Its interest is not merely the magnitude of the cardinal: it packages a universe-like portion of set theory, or a coherent way of comparing the universe with a proper inner model. Such axioms form a hierarchy extending ordinary ZFC, compared through relative consistency implications. The consistency qualifications are essential; an existence axiom is not a theorem of ZFC simply because its consequences are attractive.
The basic example is a strongly inaccessible cardinal: an uncountable regular cardinal which is a strong limit cardinal, so
These conditions imply for every . Prove this by induction along the cumulative hierarchy: the successor step uses the strong-limit property, and a limit step uses regularity to bound a union of fewer than smaller sets. Thus every member of has cardinality below .
Consequently is a transitive model of ZFC. Pairing, union, power set, separation, axiom of infinity and foundation stay within the hierarchy. For replacement, a definable function on has fewer than values; regularity bounds their ranks below , putting the range in . Ambient choice supplies a choice function for a family in , and its graph also has bounded rank. This verifies the substantial closure axiom rather than only saying that the rank is large. It also shows why inaccessible existence cannot be proved in a consistent ZFC: it would yield a set first-order model of ZFC and hence its consistency, contrary to the Gödel second incompleteness theorem.
An uncountable regular limit cardinal is a weakly inaccessible cardinal; requiring the strong-limit inequality is stronger without additional hypotheses. Under GCH, every smaller infinite cardinal satisfies , so the two notions coincide. This distinction separates cardinal-arithmetic assumptions from the regularity requirement.
A Mahlo cardinal is an inaccessible whose inaccessible cardinals below it form a stationary set. Thus every club set meets those inaccessibles, which strengthens mere unboundedness. There are inaccessible ; is a first-order model of ZFC containing an inaccessible . Mahloness therefore supplies a consistency statement stronger than the bare existence of one inaccessible. Iterating the demand that smaller cardinals have the same reflection property leads to further levels of the hierarchy.
A weakly compact cardinal is a logical and combinatorial strengthening of inaccessibility. One standard characterization is an inaccessible with
every two-colouring of pairs has a homogeneous subset of size . Equivalently one can use compactness for theories of size at most , or the tree property at an inaccessible. These viewpoints explain the terminology: a local collection of compatible requirements has a global realization, and tall narrow trees cannot avoid cofinal branches. They are characterization statements; the elementary closure and measure arguments below are separate proofs of the consequences used here.
A measurable cardinal carries a nonprincipal kappa-complete ultrafilter on . Every set of size less than is -null, since it is a union of fewer than null singletons. Such a cardinal is regular: a cofinal sequence of length would partition into bounded, hence null, pieces; completeness would make their union null, an impossibility.
It is also strong limit. If and there were distinct sets for , choose for each the -large side of the partition according to whether . The intersection of these fewer than large sides belongs to , but all its indices designate the same subset of , so it has at most one member. This contradicts nonprincipality. Hence , proving that every measurable cardinal is inaccessible.
The measure gives an ultrapower embedding. Form equivalence classes of functions under equality on a -large set, with membership defined coordinatewise modulo . Induction on first-order formulas proves elementarity: Boolean operations use the ultrafilter laws, and the existential step chooses coordinate witnesses on a large set. Countable completeness makes the ultrapower well-founded. An infinite descending membership chain would give countably many large coordinate conditions; their intersection would produce an actual infinite membership descent in . Collapse the ultrapower to a transitive class , obtaining .
For , every function into is constant on a large set by completeness; induction shows . The class of the identity function is larger than every such constant ordinal and lies below , so . Thus the critical point of an elementary embedding is . The measure viewpoint has become a precise self-similarity principle for the universe.
A supercompact cardinal imposes arbitrarily strong closure on these embeddings: for every there is with critical point , , and . It implies measurability by the derived ultrafilter
Elementarity makes this an ultrafilter; fixed ordinals below show that singletons are null. For , fixes the indexing length, so it carries an intersection of sets to the intersection of their images. If all these images contain , so does their intersection, proving -completeness.
These examples illustrate three connected uses of large cardinals: obtaining set first-order models and stronger consistency statements, extending finite or countable compactness and partition phenomena to uncountable domains, and constructing elementary embeddings with controlled closure. They also interact with inner models: an inaccessible remains inaccessible in the constructible universe, since it cannot acquire a new short cofinal sequence there and there are fewer subsets of smaller ordinals. A measurable cardinal's measure need not belong to that inner model, so preservation of the stronger property is a different issue. Large cardinal axioms are thus structured additional hypotheses, with carefully distinguishable consequences and relative-consistency claims, rather than a single claim that sufficiently big cardinals exist.
The partition relation says that every colouring of the -element subsets of a set of cardinality into colours has a homogeneous set of cardinality . Define the beth numbers over an infinite cardinal by and . The Erdős-Rado theorem for finite arities gives the precise bound
Thus any fixed finite arity and any fixed infinite number of colours admit arbitrarily large infinite monochromatic sets once the starting cardinal is sufficiently large. For pairs, the especially useful case is . The successor in this bound matters: a binary first-difference colouring on a suitably ordered set of binary sequences supplies the familiar obstruction at . Also, a theorem for every fixed finite arity is not a theorem homogenizing all arities simultaneously.
The mechanism is to build an end-homogeneous routing tree: each new vertex is routed according to its colours to earlier vertices on its branch. A long branch is end-homogeneous, meaning the colour from a fixed earlier vertex is independent of the later vertex. There are at most routes of length , and the whole collection of short routes has size at most . Inserting vertices therefore forces a branch of length . One colour occurs at earlier vertices on that branch, giving the pair theorem. Iterating the higher-arity version of this routing construction explains the successive powers in the Erdős-Rado theorem for finite arities.
A weakly compact cardinal is an uncountable strongly inaccessible cardinal with
Equivalent formulations include the tree property at the inaccessible cardinal and compactness for theories of size at most in the infinitary language : if every subtheory of size has a first-order model, so does the theory.
A measurable cardinal is an uncountable carrying a nonprincipal ultrafilter closed under intersections of fewer than members. Such an ultrafilter contains no set of size , since all singletons have complements in it and it is kappa-complete. Consequently a cofinal sequence of length would partition into too few small pieces, so is regular cardinal. If and distinct subsets of existed, choose, for each coordinate of , the bit selected by the ultrafilter. Kappa-completeness would make all those bits simultaneously constant on a large set of indices; only one distinct subset could have that bit pattern, a contradiction. Hence : is also a strong limit cardinal.
A supercompact cardinal has, for every , a fine ultrafilter that is a normal ultrafilter on small subsets and is kappa-complete on
Fine means is large for every . Normal means that a function with on a large set is constant on some large set. Equivalently, for every such there is an elementary embedding with critical point , , and closed under -sequences from the universe.
These notions form the implication chain supercompact measurable weakly compact. For the first implication, an embedding as above gives the measure . For the second, use a normal ultrafilter on a cardinal obtained by normalizing its measure. Indeed the ultrapower embedding gives the measure ; for a regressive , is a fixed ordinal, yielding the required constant large fibre. Given a pair-colouring, select for each the measure-one colour on the tail above . One selected colour occurs on a measure-one set of 's. Normality makes the diagonal intersection of their selected tails measure one; any two members of that intersection have the selected colour. This gives the required partition relation, and the preceding regularity and strong-limit argument gives inaccessibility.
For an infinite cardinal put and . The Erdős-Rado theorem for finite arities is
The partition relation requires a homogeneous subset of order type for every coloring of -element subsets by at most colors. In particular it gives uncountable homogeneous sets. The case is the infinite pigeonhole principle: a union of sets each of size at most cannot have size .
We give the induction step by a closed elementary-submodel construction of an end-homogeneous sequence. Let be infinite, , and with . Choose a sufficiently large regular and an elementary submodel with , all ordinals below in , , and closure under externally given sequences of length at most . To construct it, take successive elementary Skolem-hull closures, at each step including all such sequences from the preceding stage. Cardinality stays because . In the final union every sequence of length at most has all its entries in some earlier stage, by regularity of , and so was included at the next stage.
Put . Regularity of gives , and since otherwise its successor would contradict the definition of the supremum. Recursively, for choose above all earlier and satisfying
There are at most constraints. Their parameters and their colors belong to , and closure puts their complete code in . The point witnesses their simultaneous satisfiability in ; elementarity supplies a witness in . This gives an increasing end-homogeneous sequence of length : on it, the color of an -tuple depends only on the first entries.
For the induction from arity to , take and . Color the -tuples of the resulting sequence by their common color with a later point, equivalently by their color with . Its index order has type , so the induction hypothesis supplies a homogeneous index set of type . The original -tuples on those indices have that same color. This completes the proof without substituting the theorem's name for its induction.
A useful ordinal partition-bound function is
It is total: choose an infinite cardinal with ; the pairs case supplies with the required homogeneous order type for all these color numbers. It is nondecreasing and satisfies . Start iterating and take a supremum at a limit stage. If the increasing iterates do not attain that supremum, then for every some iterate satisfies , and
If the iterates have already stabilized, their supremum is a fixed point directly. Thus the relevant nontrivial case is an uncountable cardinal closed below itself under .
Such closure implies that is a strong limit. Suppose is infinite and . Take distinct binary strings of length , indexed in order by , and color a pair by its first differing coordinate. No three strings are homogeneous: three bits cannot be pairwise different at the same coordinate. Closure would give , and its restriction would have a homogeneous subset of order type in colors, a contradiction. Hence ; finite exponents are harmless for an uncountable .
Use the usual tree property: every set-theoretic tree of height with nonempty levels of cardinality below has a cofinal branch. For an uncountable cardinal satisfying this all-set-theoretic trees convention, must be regular. If it were singular with cofinality , attach to one root chains whose lengths increase cofinally to . Every level has at most nodes, the height is , and no branch is cofinal. This contradiction proves regularity. Combined with the preceding closure argument it proves that the cardinal under discussion is strongly inaccessible.
For any , , make a separated set-theoretic tree of functions. Its level consists of the functions realized as for some , with . Order these functions by restriction. Levels are nonempty and have size at most , using the strong-limit property. The tree property gives a branch . Recursively select for , larger than all earlier selections, whose coloring function agrees with through a level above those earlier selections; regularity allows that level to remain below , and its node has a realizing point. Then for . One of the fewer-than- colors occurs on selected points, by regularity. These points are homogeneous, proving for every . Consequently
A strictly increasing countable iteration has a supremum of countable cofinality, so it cannot meet this regular set-theoretic tree-property condition; no continuity of has been assumed.
The final printed assertion needs its convention specified. The usual tree property alone does not imply strong inaccessibility; it can consistently hold at successor cardinals. In the argument just given, strong inaccessibility follows from function closure together with that set-theoretic tree property. There is also a stronger branching form of the tree property for which the assertion holds literally: require a cofinal branch in every separated rooted height- set-theoretic tree whose nodes each have fewer than immediate successors, without restricting level sizes. The singular-chain example proves regularity under this convention too. If for , take the full binary set-theoretic tree through level , choose distinct nodes on that level, and attach to its th chosen node a chain of length , for . It has height and at most two successors per node, but every branch has length below . Thus this branching property implies the strong-limit condition and hence strong inaccessibility. At a strongly inaccessible cardinal it agrees, for separated set-theoretic trees, with the usual level-size convention: regularity bounds the union of fewer than successor sets, and strong-limit arithmetic bounds the possible predecessor sequences at limit levels.
An uncountable cardinal is a measurable cardinal if there is a nonprincipal -complete ultrafilter on : intersections of fewer than members of remain in . Such an ultrafilter is uniform. No singleton belongs to it, and intersecting the complements of fewer than singletons shows that no set of cardinality below belongs to it.
Form the ultrapower of the universe by , with classes of functions , and exactly when . The Łoś theorem proves that the map taking to the constant function with value is elementary. The ultrapower relation is well-founded: from an infinite descending sequence , countable completeness gives a coordinate satisfying all the membership relations, producing an actual infinite descending membership sequence and contradicting foundation. It is also set-like. Predecessors of can be represented by functions whose value at lies in ; these functions form a set. The Mostowski collapse theorem therefore gives a transitive class and an elementary embedding
The usual class-ultrapower notation is understood via set-sized representatives and this set-like collapse.
For , any function into is constant on a -large set: if none of its fewer-than- fibers belonged to , intersect their complements to get the empty set in . Consequently every member of the ultrapower ordinal represented by the constant is represented by a constant ordinal below . Induction on now gives .
On the other hand the identity function represents an ordinal below . For every , the tail belongs to , so the collapsed ordinal is above . Hence
This proves nonidentity explicitly. The collapsed identity class is at least ; it need not equal unless an additional normality convention is imposed on .
Conversely, an elementary embedding into a transitive class with critical point yields
For the converse use the usual amenability assumption on the class embedding, so this collection is a set. Since , exactly one of and contains , proving the ultrafilter condition. Singletons are excluded because . If and for , then fixes and every index below it, giving ; the intersection still contains . Thus is -complete and is measurable.
In particular the first moved ordinal is a strongly inaccessible cardinal. If , partition into fewer than bounded intervals. Each is too small to lie in , contradicting completeness. Thus is regular. If for some , choose distinct subsets for . For each , choose the -large side of the question . Intersect these fewer-than- large sides. The intersection belongs to , but all its indices have identical , so it contains at most one index, contradicting nonprincipality. Therefore for every , as required.
A measurable cardinal is an uncountable cardinal carrying a nonprincipal -complete ultrafilter : intersections of fewer than members of remain in . Such an ultrafilter contains no set of size less than . Indeed each singleton is absent, and intersecting fewer than singleton complements shows that every small set's complement is in . In particular every tail of is in .
Form the ultrapower of the universe by functions , identifying functions agreeing on a member of , and interpreting membership coordinatewise modulo . The Łoś theorem, applied separately to each formula, makes the map elementary. Countable completeness makes the ultrapower well-founded: an infinite descending chain would give -large sets witnessing each step, whose countable intersection is nonempty; a coordinate in that intersection would give an infinite descending membership chain in the original universe. The relation is extensional and set-like, so the Mostowski collapse theorem gives a transitive class and an elementary ultrapower embedding .
For each , every function is constant modulo . If no fibre were in , intersecting the fewer than fibre complements would give the empty set in . Induction on therefore shows that the collapsed ultrapower ordinal has precisely the elements , so
The identity function represents an ordinal below , and every constant is below it modulo , since a tail is large. Consequently
Thus the canonical collapsed embedding is not the identity; its first moved ordinal is . For a general measure the identity-function class need not collapse to exactly ; that stronger equality holds for a normal measure. The argument above needs only its lower bound.
Conversely, suppose is elementary, is transitive, its critical point is , and its derived measure is a set, as for the usual definable or amenable class embeddings. Define
Because , elementary preservation of complements and intersections makes this an ultrafilter. It is nonprincipal since for . For a sequence of large sets, fixes the index ordinal and takes the intersection to the intersection of their images; belongs to every image and hence to the intersection. Thus is -complete. The set-existence qualification excludes treating an arbitrary external class map as a set parameter without justification.
For context, measurability already implies regularity and the strong-limit property. A cofinal sequence of length below partitions into that many bounded, hence small, pieces; completeness and their absent fibres contradict covering all of . If there were distinct subsets of some , for each coordinate choose the -large side deciding its membership bit. The intersection of these large sets would still be large, but all its indices would label the same subset, so it would have at most one member. This contradiction gives . Thus the first moved ordinal is an uncountable strongly inaccessible cardinal, in addition to being measurable.
A strongly inaccessible cardinal is an uncountable cardinal that is both regular and a strong limit:
Regularity excludes expressing as the supremum of a shorter increasing sequence, while the strong-limit requirement concerns all smaller power sets. Merely being an uncountable regular limit cardinal is the weaker notion of a weakly inaccessible cardinal.
The axiom of infinity excludes and all smaller stages, so the cardinal is uncountable. Full semantics for second-order logic is decisive: every externally specified functional relation whose ordered pairs lie in is an allowed class parameter, even if the relation itself is not an element of .
If , choose an external cofinal function . Its graph is an allowed class parameter: each input, output and ordered pair has rank of a set below the infinite cardinal , which is a limit ordinal. The domain belongs to . The second-order form of Axiom schema of replacement would give its range as an element of . But a cofinal subset of has rank of a set and cannot belong to . Therefore .
If for a cardinal , choice supplies an external surjection . The domain belongs to and the ordered pairs of its graph have ranks below . Applying Axiom schema of replacement to this external functional class would put its range, the ordinal , in , again impossible. Hence for every .
Consequently
These are exactly the defining conditions for a strongly inaccessible cardinal. This full second-order replacement rank obstruction would not follow from Henkin semantics, where the available class relations may exclude the external functions just used.
First express inaccessibility by universally excluding witnesses to its failure. Besides being an ordinal greater than , require that for every there is no function from cofinal in , and no injection from into . The first condition gives regular cardinalhood; the second says that 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 , and being an injection whose values are subsets of 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 is Mahlo in . It is inaccessible in the constructible universe , and every -inaccessible ordinal below it is also inaccessible in . Let be any set that regards as a club set in . Closure and unboundedness are absolute properties of this fixed set of ordinals, so is also a club set in . By Mahloness in , it contains an ordinal that is inaccessible in , hence in . Every -club therefore meets the -inaccessible ordinals below . Thus Mahloness is downward absolute to the constructible universe:
Use the standard convention that a strongly inaccessible cardinal is uncountable, regular and strong limit. The printed explanatory definition omits uncountability: literally it also admits , for which no finite cardinal is a worldly cardinal. Thus that omission makes the requested conclusion false under the literal abbreviated definition. The proof below applies to the usual, intended strongly inaccessible cardinal convention .
First for every . At successor stages this follows from the strong limit cardinal property, and at limits from the regular cardinal property. Consequently . In particular, for Axiom schema of replacement, a domain has size less than , so its functional image has fewer than elements, so the supremum of the rank of a set over its elements is below by regular cardinal structure. All other axioms, including axiom of choice, have their witnesses at bounded ranks below ; uncountability supplies axiom of infinity.
Enumerate the first-order formulas as . For each finite collection, reflection inside the set structure gives a closed unbounded subset of of agreeing ranks. To see why the witness bounds stay below , there are fewer than parameter tuples at each , and the supremum of their least witness ranks remains below by regular cardinal structure. Closing under these bounds and taking increasing countable limits gives the usual reflection theorem for definable hierarchies argument. The countable intersection of these closed unbounded subsets is still closed unbounded because is regular and uncountable. At each resulting ,
The infinite cardinal numbers below also form a closed unbounded subset: they are unbounded because for infinite , and a supremum of increasing cardinal numbers is a cardinal number. Intersect the two closed unbounded subsets. Every member of the intersection is a worldly cardinal, and an unbounded subset of a regular cardinal has size . Hence
In fact this proves the stronger worldly cardinals below an inaccessible cardinal result that these worldly cardinals contain a closed unbounded subset of .
An uncountable cardinal number is weakly compact when every -satisfiable theory in an infinitary language with at most nonlogical symbols is satisfiable. A cardinal is inaccessible when it is uncountable, regular, and a strong limit cardinal.
Two standard results supply the proof. First, every weakly compact cardinal is inaccessible. Second, every weakly compact has the Keisler extension property: there is a transitive set such that
and . Since is inaccessible, the relevant downward absoluteness makes “ is inaccessible”. Hence satisfies “there is an inaccessible cardinal”. By elementarity, satisfies the same sentence, so it contains some inaccessible . Every ordinal in is below , and inaccessibility is absolute here, giving
Write for the equivalence class of in the ultrapower
and define its membership relation by
The kappa-complete filter property makes well-founded: an infinite descending -chain would give countably many members of whose intersection belongs to , and every index in that intersection would yield an infinite descending membership chain, contradicting the Axiom of foundation. The relation is extensional by Łoś's theorem.
The Mostowski collapse theorem therefore gives a unique isomorphism onto a transitive set . Recursively, the notation missing from the printed formula may be defined by
The value is independent of the representative because it is defined on the ultrapower class . Moreover : every has its range contained in some with , since and the strongly inaccessible cardinal is regular; induction on the resulting rank bound keeps inside .
Define the ultrapower embedding
The constant-function map into is elementary by Łoś's theorem, and is an isomorphism, so their composite is elementary.
A property of reflects below when
is unbounded in . The standard elementary-embedding reflection argument starts with any . Since and , the target model can use itself as a witness to
Elementarity then gives a witness with in the domain.
For a concrete example, the property of being a strongly inaccessible cardinal reflects below . A measurable cardinal is strongly inaccessible, and the assumed inclusion makes this assertion about absolute between and : both models have all subsets of every ordinal below . Thus sees that is strongly inaccessible. Given , it therefore satisfies
Elementarity supplies a strongly inaccessible between and in . As was arbitrary, the strongly inaccessible cardinals below are unbounded.
An strongly inaccessible cardinal has the Keisler extension property when there is a proper transitive set such that
Suppose is strongly inaccessible and has this property. Because properly extends the transitive set , it contains . Strong inaccessibility of is downward absolute from the ambient universe to the transitive set : any internal witness that is countable, singular, or not a strong limit would also be an ambient witness. Hence
with as a witness. Since , the same sentence holds in . Its witness is an ordinal . The set contains , so it computes all subsets of cardinals below correctly; strong inaccessibility of is therefore absolute between and the universe. Thus there is a strongly inaccessible , and cannot be the least strongly inaccessible cardinal.
Let be the sentence asserting that a strongly inaccessible cardinal exists, and begin with
Define the iterated consistency progression
The construction is effective, so every and is a recursively axiomatized first-order theory extending ZFC.
Because extends , every theorem of , including every formal consistency statement it proves, is a theorem of ; hence . The theory proves by construction, whereas a consistent cannot prove its own consistency by Gödel second incompleteness theorem. Therefore
Likewise extends every and contains as an axiom already at stage , while does not prove it. Consequently
assuming the stated consistency hypotheses.
Since the strongly inaccessible cardinal is inaccessible, is a model of ZFC. The Downward Lowenheim-Skolem theorem gives an elementary substructure
of cardinality such that
One may obtain concretely as the Skolem hull of this set; its cardinality remains because the language of set theory is countable and .
Apply the Mostowski collapse theorem to and write for the collapse. Then is a transitive set, , and fixes pointwise. It also fixes , because it fixes every ordinal below . By elementarity, satisfies ZFC and regards as a kappa-complete filter that is a nonprincipal ultrafilter on . Therefore, with ,
The internal ultrafilter need not equal the original .
Yes. Start with the model constructed in part a. If has no internally strongly inaccessible cardinal above , put . Otherwise let be the least ordinal above that regards as strongly inaccessible, and put
In the second case because regards as inaccessible. The measure witnessing that is measurable has rank below , so it still belongs to . In both cases is a transitive set of cardinality , contains , and has no internally inaccessible ordinal strictly between and its height.
We verify absoluteness for every ordinal . If , then and both contain and therefore compute all subsets and functions relevant to strong inaccessibility in the same way. At , both models see a measurable cardinal and hence an inaccessible cardinal. Finally, if , then says that is not inaccessible by construction. The larger model cannot say that it is inaccessible, because strong inaccessibility is downward absolute to a transitive model of ZFC: any failure visible in the smaller model remains a failure in the larger one, while ambient inaccessibility would force internal inaccessibility. Hence “ is inaccessible” is absolute between and .