It is consistent with ZFC that B_1-groups are not B_2-groups

Saharon Shelah; Lutz Strüngmann

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · math/0012172

It is consistent with ZFC that B_1-groups are not B_2-groups

Saharon Shelah·Lutz Strüngmann

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A torsion-free abelian group B of arbitrary rank is called a B_1-group if Bext^1(B,T)=0 for every torsion abelian group T, where Bext^1 denotes the group of equivalence classes of all balanced exact extensions of T by B. It is a long-standing problem whether or not the class of B_1-groups coincides with the class of B_2-groups. A torsion-free abelian group B is called a B_2-group if there exists a continuous well-ordered ascending chain of pure subgroups, 0=B_0 subset B_1 subset ... subset B_alpha subset ... subset B_lambda =B=bigcup_{alpha in lambda} B_alpha such that B_{alpha+1}=B_alpha+G_alpha for every alpha in lambda for some finite rank Butler group G_alpha. Both, B_1-groups and B_2-groups are natural generalizations of finite rank Butler groups to the infinite rank case and it is known that every B_2-group is a B_1-group. Moreover, assuming V=L it was proven that the two classes coincide. Here we demonstrate that it is undecidable in ZFC whether or not all B_1-groups are B_2-groups. Using Cohen forcing we prove that there is a model of ZFC in which there exists a B_1-group that is not a B_2-group.

Explore related subjects

math.LO math.GR

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Saharon Shelah, Lutz Strüngmann. 2000-12-18. It is consistent with ZFC that B_1-groups are not B_2-groups. https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0012172

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗