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.
Closure, distributivity, and absence of new short sequences
Statement
In ZFC, for an infinite regular and a separative forcing order , -distributivity of is equivalent to adding no new sequences of ground-model elements of length below . For an arbitrary forcing preorder, the equivalence applies to its separative quotient. Every -closed is -distributive. Hence -closed forcing adds no new subsets of any ordinal and preserves all ground-model cofinalities and cardinals at most .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, a regular infinite , and a forcing preorder ; in the equivalence, is separative, meaning that has an extension incompatible with .
Closure, distributivity, and chain conditions for forcing orders fixes the strict length bounds and order orientation.
Forcing theorem supplies deciding extensions and the truth lemma.
Transfinite recursion constructs sequences of decisions of length below .
Proof
Suppose is -closed. Given and dense open for , recursively choose in and at each limit take a lower bound. Regularity keeps every stage below ; a final lower bound belongs to every . Thus is -distributive. AC is used for the recursive choices.
Suppose is -distributive and for . For each , the set of conditions deciding is dense open. A common extension decides every coordinate, say as . Replacement forms in the ground model and . Conversely, assume that separative adds no such sequence. Given maximal antichains for , let be the unique member of met by the generic. This is a name for a -sequence of ground-model conditions, hence conditions deciding its whole ground-model value are dense. If decides that value as , then for every : otherwise separativity gives incompatible with , while a generic through must both realize the decision and meet , a contradiction. A maximal antichain of such therefore refines every . Replacing each dense open set by a maximal antichain contained in it proves that the intersection of the original family is dense. AC is used to choose the maximal antichains.
A subset of is a -valued sequence of length , so closure adds none. A new cofinal map into a ground-model ordinal of cofinality at most , or a collapse of a cardinal at most , would yield after restricting to a cofinal domain a new sequence of ground-model ordinals of length below . Hence those cofinalities and cardinals are preserved.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
15 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 4.16 and Corollary 4.17 (standard reference, not scraped)