How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Ccc posets are proper by maximal antichains
Statement
Let be ccc, let be a relevant countable elementary submodel containing , and let . Then itself is an -master condition.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: ZFC, the stronger-is-smaller forcing order, and as in the Statement.
Every ccc forcing preorder is proper; the verification below calculates the stronger master condition used in that proof. Ccc and countably closed forcings are proper
Verification
Fix a dense set with . By elementarity, inside choose a maximal antichain . It is also maximal in : maximality is the first-order assertion that every is compatible with some , and all witnesses to compatibility are conditions in the ambient . Since is ccc, is countable in the universe. Elementarity then puts in a surjection (or a finite enumeration), and every belongs to ; hence .
Let be arbitrary. Maximality of gives compatible with . By step 1.1, . Thus is predense below . Since this holds for every dense , is -generic; the reflexive inequality makes it a master below the original .
The calculation works unchanged when , , or is finite. A dense subset of the stipulated nonempty cannot be empty, and for a one-condition order its unique condition is the required antichain member and master. No stronger condition than was constructed: ccc makes the starting condition itself sufficient.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
5 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Karagila, Forcing & Symmetric Extensions, Theorem 8.7, printed p.39 (standard reference, not scraped)