Non-absoluteness of Hjorth’s cardinal characterization
Volume 262 / 2023
Abstract
In [J. Math. Log. 2 (2002), 113–144], Hjorth proved that for every countable ordinal $\alpha $, there exists a complete $\mathcal L_{\omega _1,\omega }$-sentence $\phi _\alpha $ that has models of all cardinalities less than or equal to $\aleph _{\alpha }$, but no models of cardinality $\aleph _{\alpha +1}$. Unfortunately, his solution does not yield a single $\mathcal L_{\omega _1,\omega }$-sentence $\phi _\alpha $, but a set of $\mathcal L_{\omega _1,\omega }$-sentences, one of which is guaranteed to work. It was conjectured in [Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 55 (2014), 533–551] that it is independent of the axioms of ZFC which of these sentences has the desired property.
In the present paper, we prove that this conjecture is true. More specifically, we isolate a diagonalization principle for functions from $\omega _1$ to $\omega _1$ which is a consequence of the Bounded Proper Forcing Axiom (BPFA) and then we use this principle to prove that Hjorth’s solution to characterizing $\aleph _2$ in models of BPFA is different than in models of CH. In addition, we show that large cardinals are not needed to obtain this independence result by proving that our diagonalization principle can be forced over models of CH.
