I know that |$\mathbb R$| can be any cardinal with cofinaly not equal to $\aleph_0$. Does this include inaccessible cardinals?
And what would be the consequences if |$\mathbb R$| = $\kappa$?
2026-03-29 19:10:12.1774811412
Is it possible that |$\mathbb R$| is an inaccessible cardinal?
578 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in SET-THEORY
- Theorems in MK would imply theorems in ZFC
- What formula proved in MK or Godel Incompleteness theorem
- Proving the schema of separation from replacement
- Understanding the Axiom of Replacement
- Ordinals and cardinals in ETCS set axiomatic
- Minimal model over forcing iteration
- How can I prove that the collection of all (class-)function from a proper class A to a class B is empty?
- max of limit cardinals smaller than a successor cardinal bigger than $\aleph_\omega$
- Canonical choice of many elements not contained in a set
- Non-standard axioms + ZF and rest of math
Related Questions in LARGE-CARDINALS
- Target of a superstrong embedding
- Possibility of preserving the ultrafilter on $\mathcal{P}_{\kappa}(\lambda)$ in V[G] after forcing with a <$\kappa$ directed closed poset?
- If $G$ is $P$-generic over $V$ and $G^*$ is $j''P$-generic over $M$ then $j$ can be extended to $V[G]$.
- Normality of some generic ultrafilter
- Does ZFC + the Axiom of Constructibility imply the nonexistence of inaccessible cardinals?
- Inaccessibility in L vs. Inaccessibility in ZFC
- Proof that the cofinality of the least worldly cardinal is $\omega$
- Inaccessible side-effects in MK
- Definition of an $\omega$-huge cardinal
- Regarding Extenders
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
It depends what you mean by "inaccessible" - strongly inaccessible or weakly inaccessible.
Since a strongly inaccessible $\kappa$ is by definition uncountable and bigger than $2^\lambda$ for every $\lambda<\kappa$, we can't have $\vert\mathbb{R}\vert$ be strongly inaccessible.
On the other hand, we can have $\vert\mathbb{R}\vert$ be weakly inaccessible (that is, a regular limit cardinal), at least assuming that the existence of weakly inaccessible cardinals is consistent with ZFC. The proof that this is possible uses forcing, but if you've already seen forcing then here's the outline:
Suppose $V$ is a model of ZFC with an inaccessible cardinal $\kappa$.
Consider $L^V$, that is, $V$'s version of the constructible universe.
In $L^V$, the Continuum Hypothesis holds and $\kappa$ is still weakly inaccessible - so in $L^V$ we have $2^{\aleph_0}<\kappa$.
Now we force: add $\kappa$-many Cohen reals. Since this forcing is c.c.c., it preserves cardinals and cofinalities, so $\kappa$ remains a weakly inaccessible cardinal; but now $2^{\aleph_0}=\kappa$. (Actually, all that's obvious is that $2^{\aleph_0}\ge\kappa$; it takes an argument, using "nice names," to show that in fact we have equality. This isn't hard but it's worth pointing out.)
Meanwhile, as far as consequences of $2^{\aleph_0}$ being weakly inaccessible go, I'm not aware of any big ones beyond the obvious (e.g. CH isn't true).
Some further comments:
In the proof sketch above, why did I need to pass to $L$ instead of working in $V$? Well, we could have in $V$ that $2^{\aleph_0}>\kappa$, in which case adding $\kappa$-many Cohen reals won't make $2^{\aleph_0}=\kappa$. Instead, if we want to handle this case without going to $L$ we need to collapse a cardinal: force with the set of partial maps from $\kappa$ to $\mathbb{R}$ whose domains have cardinality $<\kappa$. Since this is $(<\kappa)$-closed, $\kappa$ will stay weakly inaccessible.
What if I try to run the same argument as above, but with $\kappa$ strongly inaccessible? Well, now in the last bullet point, I need to argue somehow that $\kappa$ remains strongly inaccessible after forcing, and this breaks down: specifically, there is no reason to have $2^\lambda<\kappa$ for all $\lambda<\kappa$ after we force.
Finally, it's worth pointing out that there are senses in which $\kappa=\vert\mathbb{R}\vert$ can "appear" strongly inaccessible (or more): namely, by looking at $\kappa$ in an inner model $M$ (e.g. $M=L$). This inner model could be much smaller than $V$, and in particular it could be wrong about how the powerset function works: we'll always have $(2^\lambda)^M\le (2^\lambda)^V$, but not necessarily conversely. So it's totally possible to have e.g. "$2^{\aleph_0}$ is strongly inaccessible in $L$" (in fact, this will be true whenever $2^{\aleph_0}$ is weakly inaccessible, since weakly inaccessible cardinals are strongly inaccessible in $L$ since $L$ satisfies the GCH!). If you're interested in understanding how properties can differ between an inner model and the whole model, the term to look for is "absoluteness."