Abstract
Every definable forcing class Γ gives rise to a corresponding forcing modality \({\square _\Gamma }\) where \({\square _{\Gamma \varphi }}\) means that ϕ is true in all Γ extensions, and the valid principles of Γ forcing are the modal assertions that are valid for this forcing interpretation. For example, [10] shows that if ZFC is consistent, then the ZFC-provably valid principles of the class of all forcing are precisely the assertions of the modal theory S4.2. In this article, we prove similarly that the provably valid principles of collapse forcing, Cohen forcing and other classes are in each case exactly S4.3; the provably valid principles of c.c.c. forcing, proper forcing, and others are each contained within S4.3 and do not contain S4.2; the provably valid principles of countably closed forcing, CH-preserving forcing and others are each exactly S4.2; and the provably valid principles of ω 1-preserving forcing are contained within S4.tBA. All these results arise from general structural connections we have identified between a forcing class and the modal logic of forcing to which it gives rise.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
U. Abraham, On forcing without the continuum hypothesis, Journal of Symbolic Logic 48 (1983), 658–661.
P. Blackburn, M. de Rijke and Y. Venema, Modal Logic, Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Vol. 53, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001.
A. Chagrov and M. Zakharyaschev, Modal logic, Oxford Logic Guides, Vol. 35, Oxford University Press, New York, 1997.
L. Esakia and B. Löwe, Fatal Heyting algebras and forcing persistent sentences, Studia Logica 100 (2012), 163–173.
S. Friedman, S. Fuchino and H. Sakai, On the set-generic multiverse, submitted, 2012.
G. Fuchs, Closed maximality principles: implications, separations and combinations, Journal of Symbolic Logic 73 (2008), 276–308.
G. Fuchs, Combined maximality principles up to large cardinals, Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (2009), 1015–1046.
D. M. Gabbay, The decidability of the Kreisel-Putnam system, Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (1970), 431–437.
J. D. Hamkins, A simple maximality principle, Journal of Symbolic Logic 68 (2003), 527–550.
J. D. Hamkins and B. Löwe, The modal logic of forcing, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 360 (2008), 1793–1817.
J. D. Hamkins and B. Löwe, Moving up and down in the generic multiverse, in Logic and its Applications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7750, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2013, pp. 139–147.
J. D. Hamkins and W. H. Woodin, The necessary maximality principle for c.c.c. forcing is equiconsistent with a weakly compact cardinal, Mathematical Logic Quarterly 51 (2005), 493–498.
G. E. Hughes and M. J. Cresswell, A new Introduction to Modal Logic, Routledge, London, 1996.
T. C. Inamdar, On the modal logics of some set-theoretic constructions, Master’s thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2013, ILLC Publications MoL-2013-07.
T. Jech, Set Theory, 3rd ed., Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2003.
G. Leibman, Consistency strengths of modified maximality principles, Ph.D. thesis, City University of New York, 2004.
G. Leibman, The consistency strength of MPCCC(), Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (2010), 181–193.
L. L. Maksimova, D. P. Skvorcov and Valentin B. Šehtman, Impossibility of finite axiomatization of Medvedev’s logic of finite problems, Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 245 (1979), 1051–1054.
C. J. Rittberg, The modal logic of forcing, Master’s thesis, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 2010.
J. Stavi and J. Väänänen, Reflection principles for the continuum, in Logic and Algebra, Contemporary Mathematics, Vol. 302, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2002, pp. 59–84.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hamkins, J.D., Leibman, G. & Löwe, B. Structural connections between a forcing class and its modal logic. Isr. J. Math. 207, 617–651 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11856-015-1185-5
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11856-015-1185-5