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.
Cohen forcing raises and, under a name count, fixes the continuum
Statement
In ZFC, for infinite preserves cardinals and forces . If the ground model also satisfies and , then it forces . In particular, over GCH, forces the continuum to be exactly .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC and infinite .
Chain conditions preserve high cofinalities and ccc preserves cardinals gives cardinal preservation.
Cohen coordinates are distinct and mutually generic gives distinct reals.
Nice-name reduction and the ccc counting bound bounds real names.
Cardinal sum , product and exponentiation , and why they are written apart from the ordinal operations supplies exponent calculations.
Proof
By F1, F2 all cardinals are preserved. F3 supplies an injection in the extension, so .
The forcing has size . Under the additional hypotheses F4 gives at most nice names for reals. Every real has one, so ; combine with step 1.1.
Under GCH, the ground continuum is and . Apply step 2.1 with ; preservation ensures that this remains the extension's . AC is used in F2, F4, and the cardinal computations.
Depends on
- Closure and chain conditions of Cohen forcing
- Chain conditions preserve high cofinalities and ccc preserves cardinals
- Nice-name reduction and the ccc counting bound
- Cohen coordinates are distinct and mutually generic
- Cardinal sum $\kappa \oplus \lambda$, product $\kappa \otimes \lambda$ and exponentiation $\kappa^{\lambda}$, and why they are written apart from the ordinal operations
- The Axiom of Choice
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
32 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 3.31 and Corollary 3.33 (standard reference, not scraped)