Abstract
In this chapter we present a general technique, called forcing, for extending models of ZFC. The main ingredients to construct such an extension are a model V of ZFC (e.g., \(\mathbf{V} =\boldsymbol{\mathop{ \mathrm{L}}\nolimits }\)), a partially ordered set \(\mathbb{P} = (P,\leq )\) contained in V, as well as a special subset G of P which will not belong to V. The extended model V[G] will then consist of all sets which can be “described” or “named” in V, where the “naming” depends on the set G. The main task will be to prove that V[G] is a model of ZFC as well as to decide (within V) whether a given statement is true or false in a certain extension V[G].
To get an idea of how this is done, think for a moment that there are people living in V. Notice that for these people, V is the unique set-theoretic universe which contains all sets. Now, the key point is that for any statement, these people are in fact able to compute whether the statement is true or false in a particular extension V[G], even though they have almost no information about the set G (in fact, they would actually deny the existence of such a set).
References
Paul J. Cohen, The independence of the continuum hypothesis I., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (U.S.A.), vol. 50 (1963), 1143–1148.
_________ , The independence of the continuum hypothesis II., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (U.S.A.), vol. 51 (1964), 105–110.
_________ , Independence results in set theory, in The Theory of Models, Proceedings of the 1963 International Symposium at Berkeley (J.W. Addison, L. Henkin, and A. Tarski, eds.), [Studies in Logic and the Foundation of Mathematics], North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965, pp. 39–54.
_________ , Set Theory and the Continuum Hypothesis, Benjamin, New York, 1966.
_________ , The discovery of forcing, Proceedings of the Second Honolulu Conference on Abelian Groups and Modules (Honolulu, HI, 2001), vol. 32, 2002, pp. 1071–1100.
William B. Easton, Powers of regular cardinals, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 1 (1970), 139–178.
Solomon Feferman, Some applications of the notions of forcing and generic sets, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 56 (1964/1965), 325–345.
Thomas Jech, Multiple Forcing, [Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986.
Akihiro Kanamori, Cohen and set theory, The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, vol. 14 (2008), 351–378.
Kenneth Kunen, Set Theory, an Introduction to Independence Proofs, [Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics 102], North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983.
Gregory H. Moore, The origins of forcing, in Logic Colloquium ’86, Proceedings of the Colloquium held in Hull, U.K., July 13–19, 1986 (F.R. Drake and J.K. Truss, eds.), [Studies in Logic and the Foundation of Mathematics 124], North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988, pp. 143–173.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Halbeisen, L.J. (2017). The Notion of Forcing. In: Combinatorial Set Theory. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60231-8_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60231-8_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60230-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60231-8
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)