1: \documentclass[letterpaper]{amsart}

2: \usepackage{amsfonts,amssymb,amscd,amsmath,amsthm,txfonts}

3: \usepackage{ifpdf}

4: \usepackage{accents}

5: \usepackage[all]{xy}

6: \ifpdf

7:    \usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}

8:    \usepackage[pdftex]{graphicx}

9:    \usepackage{epstopdf}

10:    % (a) for epstopdf to work, pdflatex has to be run with

11:    %     option --shell-escape (under linux)

12:    % (b) pdf are not recreated if eps changes, so remove 

13:    %     manually

14: \else

15:    \usepackage[dvips]{hyperref}

16:    \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx} 

17: \fi

18: \usepackage{color}

19: 

20: %========================================================================

21: %  neue Umgebungen

22: %========================================================================

23: 

24: \newtheorem{MainThm}{Theorem}

25: \newtheorem{Thm}{Theorem}[section]

26: \newtheorem{Lem}[Thm]{Lemma}

27: \newtheorem*{uLem}{Lemma}

28: \newtheorem{Cor}[Thm]{Corollary}

29: \theoremstyle{definition}

30: \newtheorem{Def}[Thm]{Definition}

31: \newtheorem{Asm}[Thm]{Assumption}

32: \theoremstyle{remark}

33: \newtheorem{Rem}[Thm]{Remark}

34: \newtheorem{Note}[Thm]{Note}

35: \newtheorem*{uRem}{Remark}

36: \newtheorem*{uRems}{Remarks}

37: \newtheorem*{Fct}{Fact}

38: \newtheorem{Facts}[Thm]{Facts}

39: \newtheorem{Exm}[Thm]{Example}

40: 

41: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

42: 

43: %========================================================================

44: %  math. Abkuerzungen

45: %========================================================================

46: \newcommand{\myeinr}{\phantom{xx}}

47: \DeclareMathOperator{\EXP}{EXP}

48: \DeclareMathOperator{\flarge}{rapidgrowth}

49: \DeclareMathOperator{\dom}{dom}

50: \DeclareMathOperator{\myinv}{char}

51: \newcommand{\myinvset}{\text{CHARS}}

52: % allg. Math

53: \newcommand{\fnto}{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}}  % fuer f: A->B

54: \newcommand{\vcard}[1]{\lvert #1 \lvert }     % cardinality

55: \newcommand{\card}[1]{\vert #1 \vert }     % cardinality

56: \newcommand{\al}[1]{\ensuremath{{\aleph_{#1}}} }          % aleph_n

57: \newcommand{\om}[1]{\ensuremath{{\omega_{#1}}} }          % omega_n

58: \newcommand{\ho}{\ensuremath{^{\omega}}}                  % hoch omega

59: \newcommand{\DEFEQ}{\ensuremath{\coloneqq}}

60: \newcommand{\EQDEF}{\ensuremath{\eqqcolon}}

61: 

62: % cal

63: \newcommand{\cF}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal F}}}

64: \newcommand{\cB}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal B}}}

65: \newcommand{\SlFam}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal S}}}

66: \newcommand{\cN}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal N}}}

67: \newcommand{\cI}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal J}}}

68: \newcommand{\cL}{\ensuremath{{\mathcal L}}}

69: 

70: % bb

71: \newcommand{\bN}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{N}}}

72: \newcommand{\bQ}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{Q}}}

73: \newcommand{\bR}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{R}}}

74: \newcommand{\bB}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{B}}} % random algebra

75: \newcommand{\bC}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{C}}} % cohen forcing

76: \newcommand{\bT}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{T}}}

77: \newcommand{\bF}{\ensuremath{\mathbb{F}}}

78: 

79: %Modelltheorie

80: \newcommand{\esm}{\ensuremath{\prec}}  % elem. submodel

81: \newcommand{\vD}{\ensuremath{\vDash}}

82: 

83: \newcommand{\mS}[2]{\ensuremath{{\underaccent{\tilde}{\Sigma}^#1_#2}}}

84: \newcommand{\mP}[2]{\ensuremath{{\underaccent{\tilde}{\Pi}^#1_#2}}}

85: \newcommand{\mD}[2]{\ensuremath{{\underaccent{\tilde}{\Delta}^#1_#2}}}

86: 

87: %Forcing

88: %\newcommand{\std}[1]{\ensuremath{\widehat{#1}}}              % standardname

89: \newcommand{\std}[1]{\ensuremath{\check{#1}}}              % standardname

90: \newcommand{\forc}{\ensuremath{\Vdash}}

91: \newcommand{\incomp}{\ensuremath{\perp}}

92: \newcommand{\comp}{\ensuremath{\parallel}}

93: \newcommand{\n}[1]{\underaccent{\tilde}{#1}}

94: \DeclareMathOperator{\ro}{ro}

95: 

96: \DeclareMathOperator{\image}{image}

97: 

98: 

99: % creatures

100: \DeclareMathOperator{\nor}{nor}

101: \DeclareMathOperator{\val}{val}

102: \newcommand{\prodval}{\val^{\Pi}}

103: \DeclareMathOperator{\chalf}{half}

104: %\newcommand{\ns}{\text{nor}^*}

105: \DeclareMathOperator{\ns}{preprenor}

106: \DeclareMathOperator{\prenor}{prenor}

107: \newcommand{\cc}{\mathfrak{c}}

108: \newcommand{\cd}{\mathfrak{d}}

109: \newcommand{\cS}{\mathbf{\Sigma}}

110: \newcommand{\cSc}{\cS(\cc)}

111: \newcommand{\cK}{\mathbf{K}}

112: \newcommand{\bfH}{\mathbf{H}}

113: \newcommand{\bfF}{\mathbf{F}}

114: \newcommand{\pow}{\mathcal{P}}

115: \DeclareMathOperator{\trunk}{trunk}

116: \DeclareMathOperator{\trunklg}{trnklh}

117: \DeclareMathOperator{\supp}{supp}

118: \newcommand{\ndist}{n^\text{dist}}

119: 

120: \newcommand{\Qsu}{\mathbb{Q}^*_\infty}

121: \newcommand{\Qswu}{\mathbb{Q}^*_{w\infty}}

122: \newcommand{\Qsf}{\mathbb{Q}^*_{f}}

123: \newcommand{\myc}{c^{\exists}}

124: \newcommand{\mycfa}{c^{\forall}}

125: 

126: \begin{document}

127: \subjclass[2000]{03E17;03E40}

128: \date{\today}

129: 

130: \title{Decisive creatures and large continuum}

131: %    Information for first author

132: \author[Jakob Kellner]{Jakob Kellner$^*$}

133: %    Address of record for the research reported here

134: \address{Kurt G\"odel Research Center for Mathematical Logic\\

135:  Universit\"at Wien\\

136:  W\"ahringer Stra\ss e 25\\

137:  1090 Wien, Austria}

138: \email{kellner@fsmat.at}

139: \urladdr{http://www.logic.univie.ac.at/$\sim$kellner}

140: \thanks{$^*$ supported by a European Union Marie Curie EIF Fellowship,

141: contract MEIF-CT-2006-024483.}

142: %    Information for second author

143: \author[Saharon Shelah]{Saharon Shelah$^\dag$}

144: 

145: %\twoaddress{

146: \address{Einstein Institute of Mathematics\\

147: Edmond J. Safra Campus, Givat Ram\\

148: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem\\

149: Jerusalem, 91904, Israel\\

150: and

151: Department of Mathematics\\

152: Rutgers University\\

153: New Brunswick, NJ 08854, USA}%{4}

154: \email{shelah@math.huji.ac.il}

155: \urladdr{http://shelah.logic.at/}

156: \thanks{

157: $^\dag$

158: supported by the United States-Israel

159:   Binational Science Foundation (Grant no. 2002323), and by

160: the US National Science Foundation grant NSF-DMS 0600940,

161: publication 872.}

162: 

163: %========================================================================

164: %  ABSTRACT

165: %========================================================================

166: 

167: \begin{abstract}

168:   For $f,g\in\omega\ho$ let $\mycfa_{f,g}$ be the minimal

169:   number of uniform $g$-splitting trees needed to

170:   cover the uniform $f$-splitting tree, i.e.\ for every

171:   branch $\nu$ of the $f$-tree, one of the 

172:   $g$-trees contains $\nu$.

173:   $\myc_{f,g}$ is the dual notion: For every branch $\nu$,

174:   one of the $g$-trees guesses $\nu(m)$ infinitely often.

175: 

176:   It is consistent that

177:   $\myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\kappa_\epsilon$

178:   for $\al1$ many pairwise different cardinals $\kappa_\epsilon$

179:   and suitable pairs $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$.

180: 

181:   For the proof we use creatures with

182:   sufficient bigness and halving. We show that 

183:   the lim-inf creature forcing satisfies 

184:   fusion and pure decision. We 

185:   introduce 

186:   decisiveness and use it to construct

187:   a variant of the countable support iteration

188:   of such forcings, which still satisfies 

189:   fusion and pure decision.

190: \end{abstract}

191: \maketitle

192: 

193: 

194: 

195: 

196: 

197: \section{Introduction}

198:   In the paper {\em Many simple cardinal invariants}~\cite{GoSh:448},

199:   Goldstern and the second author construct a

200:   partial order $P$ that forces pairwise different values to

201:   $\al1$ many instances of

202:   the cardinal characteristic $\mycfa_{f,g}$,

203:   defined as follows:

204: 

205:   Let $f,g\in \omega\ho$ (usually we have $f(n)>g(n)$ for all $n$).

206:   An $(f,g)$-slalom is a sequence

207:   $S=(S(n))_{n\in\omega}$

208:   such that $S(n)\subseteq f(n)$ and $\card{S(n)}\leq g(n)$.

209:   A family $\SlFam$ of

210:   $(f,g)$-slaloms is a $(\forall,f,g)$-cover, if

211:   for all $r\in \prod_{n\in\omega} f(n)$ 

212:   there is an $S\in \SlFam$ such that

213:   $r(n)\in S(n)$ for all $n\in\omega$.

214:   $\mycfa_{f,g}$ is the minimal size of a $(\forall,f,g)$-cover.

215: 

216:   We investigate the dual notion:

217:   A family $\SlFam$ of

218:   $(f,g)$-slaloms is an $(\exists,f,g)$-cover, if

219:   for all $r\in \prod_{n\in\omega} f(n)$ there is an $S\in \SlFam$ such that

220:   $r(n)\in S(n)$ for infinitely many $n\in\omega$.

221:   $\myc_{f,g}$ is the minimal size of

222:   an $(\exists,f,g)$-cover.

223: 

224: %  These notion are closely related to families of functions of large

225: %  oscillation \cite[\S 3]{MR0396267}.

226: 

227:   In~\cite{GoSh:448}, the following is shown:

228:   \begin{quote}

229:     Assume that CH holds, that $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)_{\epsilon\in\om1}$

230:     are sufficiently different, and that

231:     \mbox{$\kappa_\epsilon^{\al0}=\kappa_\epsilon$}

232:     for all $\epsilon\in\om1$. Then there is a cardinal preserving partial

233:     order $P$ which forces that $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\kappa_\epsilon$ for all $\epsilon\in\om1$.

234:   \end{quote}

235: 

236:   Similar results regarding $\myc$ as well as a perfect set of invariants were

237:   promised to appear in a paper called 448a, which never materialized.

238:   A result for continuum many different invariants of the form

239:   $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$ can be found in~\cite{morecardinals}.

240: 

241:   In this paper, we prove a version for countably many

242:   invariants $\myc$:

243:   \begin{MainThm}\label{thm:ctbl}

244:     Assume that CH holds, that $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)_{\epsilon\in\omega}$

245:     are sufficiently different, and that

246:     \mbox{$\kappa_\epsilon^{\al0}=\kappa_\epsilon$}

247:     for all $\epsilon\in\omega$. Then there is a cardinal preserving, 

248:     $\omega^\omega$-bounding partial order $P$ which forces that

249:     $\myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\kappa_\epsilon$ for all $\epsilon\in\omega$.

250:   \end{MainThm}

251:   (See Section~\ref{sec:countable} for a definition of sufficiently different.)

252: 

253:   We can also get $\om1$ many different invariants, but we do not know

254:   in the ground model which invariants will be picked:

255:   \begin{MainThm}\label{thm:uncountable}

256:     Assume that CH holds, and that

257:     $\kappa_\epsilon^{\al0}=\kappa_\epsilon$

258:     for all $\epsilon\in\om1$. Then

259:     there are pairs $(f_\nu,g_\nu)_{\nu\in \om1}$

260:     and there is a cardinal preserving,

261:     $\omega^\omega$-bounding partial

262:     order $R$ which forces:

263:     For each $\epsilon\in\om1$ there is a $\nu(\epsilon)\in \om1$

264:     such that

265:     $\myc_{f_{\nu(\epsilon)},g_{\nu(\epsilon)}}=

266:     \mycfa_{f_{\nu(\epsilon)},g_{\nu(\epsilon)}}=\kappa_\epsilon$.

267:   \end{MainThm}

268: 

269:   In any case, if the $\kappa_\epsilon$ are pairwise different,

270:   then in the forcing extension there 

271:   are infinitely many different cardinals below the continuum, i.e.\

272:   $2^\al0>\al{\omega}$. Therefore we cannot use countable

273:   support iterations.

274:   We cannot use finite support iterations either

275:   (otherwise we add many  Cohen reals, which

276:   makes $\mycfa$ too big).

277:   Instead, we use a

278:   variant of the countable support product of lim-inf

279:   creature forcings. We do not assume that the reader knows

280:   anything about creature forcing.

281:   However, we do assume that the reader knows the definition of proper forcing

282:   (see e.g.~\cite{MR1234283} or, for the brave,~\cite{MR1623206}),

283:   and the fact that such forcings preserve $\om1$.

284:   Alternatively, it is sufficient to know

285:   Baumgartner's Axiom~A (cf.~\cite{MR823775}): it is easy to see that

286:   the forcings in this paper all satisfy Axiom~A, and Axiom~A

287:   forcings (are proper and therefore) preserve $\om1$.

288: 

289:   We write $q\leq p$ to say that $q$ is stronger than $p$.

290:   We try to stick to Goldstern's alphabetic convention, i.e.\ 

291:   whenever two conditions are compatible, the symbol used for the

292:   stronger condition comes lexicographically later.

293: 

294:   The theorems in this paper are due to the second author.

295:   The first author's contribution was to fill in some details,

296:   to ask the second author to fill in other details, and 

297:   to write the paper.

298: 

299:   We thank a referee for very carefully reading the paper and

300:   pointing out a mistake and numerous unclarities.

301: 

302:   \subsection*{Annotated contents}

303:   In the first part, we investigate lim-inf creature forcings:

304:   \begin{list}{}{\setlength{\leftmargin}{0.5cm}\addtolength{\leftmargin}{\labelwidth}}

305:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:simple}, p. \pageref{sec:simple}.]

306:       We define the (one-dimensional) 

307:       lim-inf creature forcing $\Qsu$.

308:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:puredecondim}, p. \pageref{sec:puredecondim}.]

309:       We use bigness and halving to show that $\Qsu$ satisfies 

310:       pure decision (and fusion).

311:       This implies that  $\Qsu$ is proper and $\omega^\omega$-bounding.

312:       We also show rapid reading of

313:       certain names. The proofs in this section will 

314:       be generalized in Section~\ref{sec:product}.

315:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:decisive}, p. \pageref{sec:decisive}.]

316:       We introduce decisiveness and use it to extend bigness to

317:       functions defined on finite products of creatures. This allows

318:       us to show pure decision for finite products of lim-inf creature forcings.

319:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:product}, p. \pageref{sec:product}.]

320:       We define the forcing $P$, a variant of the countable support product of

321:       lim-inf creature forcings, in such a way that the proof of

322:       Section~\ref{sec:puredecondim} still works with only few changes.

323:       We also get $\al2$-cc (assuming CH).

324:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:example}, p. \pageref{sec:example}.]

325:       We show how to construct decisive

326:       creatures with sufficient bigness and halving.

327:   \end{list}

328:   In the second part, we use the methods of Section~\ref{sec:product}

329:   to prove Theorems~\ref{thm:ctbl} and~\ref{thm:uncountable}:

330:   \begin{list}{}{\setlength{\leftmargin}{0.5cm}\addtolength{\leftmargin}{\labelwidth}}

331:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:countable}, p. \pageref{sec:countable}.]

332:       We formulate the requirements for Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}

333:       and define $P$, a variant the forcing in Section~\ref{sec:product}.

334:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:forall}, p. \pageref{sec:forall}.]

335:       We show that $P_\epsilon$, a complete subforcing

336:       of $P$, adds a $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$-cover  in $V[G_P]$.

337:       This proves $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}\leq \kappa_\epsilon$.

338:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:exists}, p. \pageref{sec:exists}.]

339:       We show that in $V[G_P]$ there can be no

340:       $\myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$-cover smaller than $\kappa_\epsilon$:

341:       Otherwise we can find a condition $q$ that rapidly reads (without

342:       using index $\beta$)

343:       a slalom $\n S$ and forces that the generic real

344:       $\n\eta_\beta$ at $\beta$ 

345:       meets $\n S$ infinitely often. We strengthen $q$ such that

346:       the possible values for the generic always\footnote{This

347:        is the reason we have to use lim-inf creature forcing

348:        instead of lim-sup: When we deal with $\mycfa$,

349:        we have to ``run away'' from $\n S$ infinitely often, 

350:        and it is enough to assume that we have sufficient space to

351:        do so infinitely often. But here we need sufficient space at {\em every}

352:        height.}

353:       avoid the slalom $\n S$, a contradiction.

354:     \item[Section~\ref{sec:uncountable}, p. \pageref{sec:uncountable}.]

355:       We construct $\om1$ many suitable pairs $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$

356:       the partial order $R$, a modification of $P$, to show

357:       Theorem~\ref{thm:uncountable}.

358:   \end{list}

359: 

360: 

361: 

362: \section{lim-inf creature forcings}\label{sec:simple}

363: Creature forcing in general is described in the monograph

364: {\em Norms on possibilities I: forcing with trees and creatures\/}~\cite{RoSh:470} by

365: Ros\l anowski and the second author. 

366: The forcing of the proof in~\cite{GoSh:448} can be interpreted as

367: creature forcing as well, more specifically as a lim-sup tree creating

368: creature forcing.

369: We will use lim-inf creatures instead.

370: These forcings are generally

371: more complicated than the lim-sup case, and~\cite{RoSh:470}

372: shows that they can collapse $\om1$.

373: In this paper, we will require increasingly strong bigness and halving, which

374: guarantees pure decision and therefore properness.

375: 

376: 

377: We now describe the setting we use.

378: Creature forcings are defined by a parameter, the creating pair $(\cK,\cS)$.

379: We use the following objects:

380: \begin{itemize}

381:   \item A function $\bfH:\omega\fnto\omega\setminus \{0\}$.

382:   \item A strictly increasing function $\bfF :\omega\fnto \omega$ such that

383:     $\bfF (0)=0$.

384:   \item For every $n\in\omega$ a finite set $\cK(n)$.

385:   \item For each $\cc\in\cK(n)$, a real number

386:     $\nor(\cc)\geq 0$, and a nonempty subset $\val(\cc)$

387:     of $\prod_{\bfF (n)\leq i<\bfF (n+1)}\bfH(i)$.

388:   \item We additionally require that $\card{\val(\cc)}=1$ implies $\nor(\cc)=0$.

389: \end{itemize}

390: 

391: A $\cc\in\cK(n)$ is called $n$-creature. The intended meaning of the

392: $n$-creature $\cc$ is the following: the set of possible values for the generic

393: object $\n\eta\in \prod_{i\in\omega}\bfH(i)$ restricted to the interval

394: \mbox{$[\bfF (n),\bfF (n+1)-1]$} is the set $\val(\cc)$.  $\nor(\cc)$ can be

395: thought of measuring the amount of ``freedom'' the creature $\cc$ leaves on its

396: interval.  If $\cc$ determines its part of the generic real (i.e.\ if

397: $\val(\cc)$ is a singleton) then $\nor(\cc)=0$ (i.e.\ $\cc$ leaves no freedom).

398: However, this intuition about $\nor(\cc)$ has to be used with caution:

399: In particular, $\val(\cd)\subseteq \val(\cc)$ does generally not imply

400: $\nor(\cd)\leq \nor(\cc)$.

401: 

402: We set $\cK\DEFEQ \bigcup_{n\in\omega} \cK(n)$.

403: 

404: In our application we will use $\bfF (n)=n$, i.e.\ an $n$-creature lives on the

405: singleton $\{n\}$.

406: 

407: 

408: We also have a

409: function $\cS: \cK\fnto \pow(\cK)$ satisfying:

410: \begin{itemize}

411:   \item If $\cc\in\cK(n)$ and $\cd\in\cSc$ then $\cd\in\cK(n)$.

412:   \item $\cS$ is reflexive, i.e.\ $\cc\in\cSc$.

413:   \item $\cS$ is transitive, i.e.\ $\cd\in\cSc$ and $\cd'\in\cS(\cd)$ implies

414:     $\cd'\in\cSc$.

415:   \item If $\cd\in\cSc$ then $\val(\cd)\subseteq \val(\cc)$ and

416:     $\nor(\cd)\leq \nor(\cc)$.

417: \end{itemize}

418: 

419: The intended meaning is that $\cS(\cc)$ is the set of creatures that are

420: stronger than $\cc$.

421: 

422: 

423: To simplify notation later on, 

424: we extend the definitions of $\nor$, $\val$ and $\cS$ to

425: sequences $s,t\in\prod_{\bfF (n)\leq i<\bfF (n+1)}\bfH(n)$:

426: We set

427: \[

428:   \nor(t)\DEFEQ  0,\quad

429:   \val(t)\DEFEQ \{t\},\quad

430:   t\in \cS(\cc)\text{ iff }t\in\val(\cc),\quad

431:   s\in \cS(t)\text{ iff }s=t.

432: \]

433: 

434: 

435: We now define the lim-inf forcing $\Qsu(\cK,\cS)$:

436: \begin{Def}

437:   A condition $p\in \Qsu(\cK,\cS)$ consists of a trunk

438:   $t\in \prod_{i<\bfF (n)} \bfH(i)$ for some $n$ and a

439:   sequence $(\cc_i)_{i\geq n}$

440:   such that 

441:   $\cc_i\in\cK(i)$ and $\nor(\cc_i)>0$ for all $i\geq n$,

442:   and $\lim(\nor(\cc_i))=\infty$.

443:   We set $\trunk(p)\DEFEQ t$,

444:   and the trunk-length $\trunklg(p)\DEFEQ n$, and we set

445:   \[

446:     p(i)\DEFEQ

447:     \begin{cases}

448:       \cc_i&\text{if }i\geq n,\\

449:       t\restriction[\bfF (i),\bfF (i+1)-1]&\text{otherwise.}

450:     \end{cases}

451:   \]

452:   So we can identify $p$ with the sequence $(p(i))_{i\in\omega}$.

453:   The order on $\Qsu$ is defined by

454:   $q\leq p$ if $\trunklg(q)\geq \trunklg(p)$ and

455:   $q(i)\in \cS(p(i))$ for all $i$.

456: \end{Def}

457: \begin{figure}[tb]

458:   \begin{center}

459:     \scalebox{0.4}{\input{pq_new.pstex_t}}

460:     \caption{\label{fig:pq_new}  (a): $q\leq p$, $\trunklg(p)=2$, $\trunklg(q)=3$. (b): $q\leq_M p$}

461:   \end{center}

462: \end{figure}

463: So in particular $q\leq p$ implies that $\trunk(q)$ extends $\trunk(p)$, see

464: Figure~\ref{fig:pq_new}(a).

465: 

466: Of course we assume that there are sufficiently large creatures, otherwise

467: $\Qsu(\cK,\cS)$ is empty.\footnote{We need:

468:   For each $l\in\omega$ there is an $n\in\omega$ such that for all

469:   $m>n$ there is some $m$-creature with norm at least $l$.

470: }

471: 

472: The forcing $\Qsu(\cK,\cS)$ adds a generic real $\n\eta\DEFEQ \bigcup_{p\in

473: G}\trunk(p)$.  Note that when we have

474: halving (see next section), the generic filter $G$ is not

475: determined by $\n\eta$, at least not in the usual way.%

476: \footnote{If $\nor(\cc)$ is a function of $\val(\cc)$ and

477:   $\val(\cd)\subseteq\val(\cc)$ implies $\cd\in\cSc$, then the generic filter

478:   is determined by $\n\eta$. This assumption is reasonable

479:   (and is satisfied in many creature forcing constructions),

480:   but it is incompatible with halving.}

481: 

482: A note on the requirement

483: \begin{equation}\label{eq:jhi25}

484:   \nor(p(i))>0 \text{ for each }i\geq \trunklg(p)

485: \end{equation}

486: in the definition of $\Qsu$:

487: \begin{itemize}

488:   \item We could drop~\eqref{eq:jhi25}, since in the resulting 

489:     forcing notion the conditions that additionally satisfy~\eqref{eq:jhi25} are dense anyway.

490:   \item Because of~\eqref{eq:jhi25}, we are really only interested in creatures with

491:     norm $>0$, so we could restrict ourselves to creating pairs

492:     containing only such creatures.

493:   \item Alternatively, we could

494:     omit the concept of trunk from the definition altogether. Instead,

495:     we could assume the following: For all $\cc\in\cK(n)$

496:     and all $s\in\val(\cc)$ there is a $\cd\in \cS(\cc)$ such that

497:     $\val(\cd)=\{s\}$ (and therefore $\nor(\cd)=0$).

498:     However, this is not the ``right'' way to think about creature forcing,

499:     and this version could not be generalized to our

500:     variant of the countable support product.

501: \end{itemize}

502: 

503: In the rest of the section, we briefly comment on how our setting

504: fits into the framework of creature forcing developed

505: in~\cite{RoSh:470}:

506: 

507: A pair $(\cK,\cS)$ as above is a creating pair as defined

508: in~\cite[1.2]{RoSh:470}.  It satisfies the following additional properties:

509: \begin{itemize}

510:   \item finitary~\cite[1.1.3]{RoSh:470}: $\bfH(n)$ and  $\cS(\cc)$

511:     are always finite.

512:   \item simple~\cite[2.1.7]{RoSh:470}:

513:     $\cS$ is defined on single creatures

514:     only.\footnote{In non-simple creating pairs we can have something like

515:     $\cd\in \cS(\{\cc_1,\cc_2\})$, e.g.\

516:     $\cc_1$ could live on the interval $I_1$, $\cc_2$ on $I_2$,

517:     and $\cd$ is $\cc_1$ and $\cc_2$ ``glued together''.}

518:   \item forgetful~\cite[1.2.5]{RoSh:470}:

519:     $\val(\cc)$ does not depend on values of the

520:     generic real outside of the interval of $\cc$.\footnote{In

521:     the general case, $\val(\cc)$ is

522:     defined as a set of pairs $(u,v)$ where

523:     $v\in \prod_{i<\bfF (n+1)}\bfH(i)$ and \mbox{$u=v\restriction \bfF (n)$}.

524:     The intended meaning is

525:     that $\cc$ implies:

526:     If the generic object $\n\eta$ restricted to $\bfF (n)$ is $u$, then

527:     the possible values $v$ for $\n\eta\restriction \bfF (n+1)$ are

528:     those $v$ such that $(u,v)\in\val(\cc)$.

529:     Then ``$\cc$ is forgetful'' is defined as:

530:     If $(u,v)\in\val(\cc)$ and $u'\in \prod_{i<\bfF (n)}\bfH(i)$

531:     then $(u',v)\in\val(\cc)$. So in

532:     the forgetful

533:     case $\val(\cc)$ and $\{v:\, (\exists u)\,(u,v)\in\val(\cc)\}$

534:     carry the same information. In this paper

535:     we call the latter set $\val(\cc)$,  for simplicity of notation.}

536:   \item nice and smooth~\cite[1.2.5]{RoSh:470}:

537:     A technical requirement that is trivial in the case of forgetful

538:     simple creating pairs.

539: \end{itemize}

540: 

541: In~\cite{RoSh:470} two main frameworks for forcings are examined:

542: creature forcings~\cite[1.2.6]{RoSh:470} (defined by a creating pair~\cite[1.2.2]{RoSh:470})

543: and tree creature forcings~\cite[1.3.5]{RoSh:470}

544: (defined via a tree-creating pair~\cite[1.3.3]{RoSh:470}).

545: So in this paper we deal with creature forcings.\footnote{Actually

546:   every simple forgetful creating pair can be interpreted as

547:   tree-creating pair as well. The resulting

548:   tree-forcing however is different from the creature forcing:

549:   the creature forcing corresponds to the ``homogeneous'' trees only.}

550: 

551: In~\cite{RoSh:470} several ways to define forcings from a creating pair are

552: introduced. One example is lim-sup creature forcing $\Qswu$ defined

553: in~\cite[1.2.6]{RoSh:470}.  {\em Many simple cardinal invariants}~\cite{GoSh:448}

554: uses (a countable support product of) such forcings.  The lim-inf case $\Qsu$

555: is generally harder to handle, and~\cite[1.4.5]{RoSh:470} proves

556: that $\Qsu$ can collapse $\om1$.  In the rest of~\cite{RoSh:470},

557: $\Qsu$ is only considered in a special case (incompatible with simple) where

558: $\Qsu$ is actually equivalent to other forcings that are better behaved

559: (cf.~\cite[p23 and 2.1.3]{RoSh:470}).  We will introduce additional assumptions

560: (increasingly strong bigness and halving) to guarantee that $\Qsu$ is proper

561: and $\omega\ho$-bounding. These assumptions will actually make $\Qsu$

562: similar to $\Qsf$ of~\cite{RoSh:470}.

563: 

564: 

565: \section{bigness and halving, properness of $\Qsu$}\label{sec:puredecondim}

566: 

567: We will now introduce properties that guarantee that $\Qsu$ is proper.

568: 

569: \begin{Def}\label{def:big}

570:   Let $0<r\leq 1$, $B\in\omega$.

571:   \begin{itemize}

572:   \item $\cc$ is $(B,r)$-big

573:       if for all functions $F:\val(\cc)\fnto B$ there is a

574:       $\cd\in\cSc$

575:       such that $\nor(\cd)\geq \nor(\cc)-r$ and

576:       $F\restriction\val(\cd)$ is constant.\footnote{This

577:       is a variant of, but technically not quite the same as,

578:       \cite[2.2.1]{RoSh:470}.}

579:   \item $\cK(n)$ is $(B,r)$-big if every $\cc\in \cK(n)$

580:       with $\nor(\cc)>1$ is $(B,r)$-big.

581:   \item $\cc$ is $r$-halving,\footnote{cf.~\cite[2.2.7]{RoSh:470}.

582:     The original definition used

583:     $\nor(\chalf(\cc))\geq \nor(\cc)/2$ instead of $\nor(\cc)-r$,

584:     therefore the name halving.}

585:     if there is a $\chalf(\cc)\in\cSc$ such that

586:     \begin{itemize}

587:     \item $\nor(\chalf(\cc))\geq \nor(\cc)-r$, and

588:     \item if $\cd\in\cS(\chalf(\cc))$ and $\nor(\cd)>0$, then

589:       there is a $\cd'\in\cSc$ such that\\

590:       $\nor(\cd')\geq \nor(\cc)-r$ and $\val(\cd')\subseteq\val(\cd)$.

591:     \end{itemize}

592:   \item $\cK(n)$ is $r$-halving, if all $\cc\in\cK(n)$ with $\nor(\cc)>1$

593:     are $r$-halving.

594:   \end{itemize}

595: \end{Def}

596: So given $\cc$ and $\cd\in\cS(\chalf(\cc))$ as in the definition

597: of halving, we can ``un-halve'' $\cd$ to get $\cd'$.

598: Note that this $\cd'$ generally is not in $\cS(\chalf(\cc))$, although

599: $\val(\cd')\subseteq \val(\cd)\subseteq\val(\chalf(\cc))$.

600: 

601: 

602: Every creature is $(1,r)$-big.

603: If  $r'$ is smaller than $r$, then

604: $(B,r')$-bigness

605: implies $(B,r)$-bigness, and

606: $r'$-halving implies $r$-halving. We also get:

607: \begin{equation}\label{eq:valbig}

608:   \text{If }\cc\text{ is }(B,r)\text{-big and }0<r<\nor(\cc)\text{, then }

609:   B<|\val(\cc)|.

610: \end{equation}

611: An example for creatures with bigness and halving (and the much stronger

612: property decisiveness) can be found in Section~\ref{sec:example}.

613: 

614: We now show that increasing bigness and halving implies properness:

615: \begin{Thm}\label{thm:onedim}

616:   Set

617:   $\varphi(\mathord< n)\DEFEQ \prod_{i <\bfF (n)}\bfH(i)$

618:   and $r(n)\DEFEQ 1/(n\varphi(\mathord< n))$.

619:   If $\cK(n)$ is $(2,r(n))$-big and

620:   $r(n)$-halving for all $n$,

621:   then $\Qsu(\cK,\cS)$ is $\omega\ho$-bounding and proper

622:   and preserves the size of the continuum (in the following sense:

623:   in the extension, there

624:   is a bijection between the reals and old reals).

625: \end{Thm}

626: So in particular, CH is preserved.

627: 

628: \begin{Note}

629:   Only the growth rate of $r$ is relevant here. In particular: Fix some

630:   $\delta>1$. Then the theorem remains valid if we replace $(2,r(n))$-big

631:   and $r(n)$-halving with the weaker 

632:   condition $(2,\delta\cdot r(n))$-big and $\delta\cdot

633:   r(n)$-halving.  Also, it does not make any difference if we require bigness and

634:   halving only for those creatures with norm bigger than $\delta$ (instead of for

635:   all creatures with norm bigger than $1$).

636: \end{Note}

637: 

638: Note that $\varphi(\mathord< n)$ is the number of possible 

639: values for $\n\eta\restriction \bfF(n)$, or equivalently

640: the number of possible trunks with trunk-length $n$.

641: 

642: We also set  $\varphi(\mathord\leq n)=\varphi(\mathord< n+1)$ and

643: $\varphi(\mathord=n)=\varphi(\mathord\leq n)/\varphi(\mathord< n)=

644: \prod_{\bfF (n)\leq i <\bfF (n+1)}\bfH(i)$.

645: 

646: 

647: In the rest of this section we set $P=\Qsu(\cK,\cS)$.

648: 

649: We use a standard pure decision argument:

650: 

651: Let $\val(p,\mathord < n)$ denote $\Pi_{i<n}\val(p(i))$, the set of possible

652: values (modulo $p$) for $\n \eta\restriction \bfF(n)$.

653: The size of this set is at most $\varphi(\mathord<n)$.

654: 

655: We define for every $s\in \Pi_{i<\bfF(n)}\bfH(i)$

656: a condition $p\wedge s$:

657: $\trunklg(p\wedge s)=\max(n,\trunklg(p))$, and 

658: \[

659:   (p\wedge s)(i)\DEFEQ

660:     \begin{cases}

661:       s\restriction [F(i),F(i+1)-1]  &  \text{if }i<n\\

662:       p(i)  &  \text{otherwise.}

663:     \end{cases}

664: \]

665: We use this notion mostly for $s\in \val(p,\mathord < n)$. In this case,

666: $p\wedge s\leq p$. Note that 

667: \begin{equation}\label{eq:x}

668:   \{p\wedge s:\, s\in \val(p,\mathord < n)\}\text{ is predense under }p,

669: \end{equation}

670: which implies for all $s\in \val(p,\mathord < n)$

671: \begin{equation}\label{eq:gut}

672:   p\wedge s\, \forc\, \varphi\text{ iff }p\,\forc\, (s<\n\eta \rightarrow \varphi).

673: \end{equation}

674: 

675: $q\leq^* p$ means that $q$ forces $p$ to be in the generic filter.

676: \begin{equation}\label{eq:gorx}

677:   q\leq^* p\text{ implies }\val(q,\mathord < n)\subseteq  \val(p,\mathord < n).

678: \end{equation}

679: It is important to note that $\val(q(i))\subseteq \val(p(i))$ for all $i$ does

680: {\em not} imply $q\leq^* p$ (or even just $q\comp p$), since 

681: $\val(\cd)\subseteq\val(\cc)$ does not imply $\cd\in\cS(\cc)$.

682: (This would contradict halving.) However, the following {\em does}\/

683: follow from~\eqref{eq:x}:

684: \begin{equation}\label{eq:gur}

685:   \text{If $\val(q(i))\subseteq \val(p(i))$ for all $i\leq h$ and $q(i)\in

686:   \cS(p(i))$ for all $i> h$, then $q\leq^* p$.}

687: \end{equation}

688: 

689: Let $\n\tau$ be a name of an ordinal. $p$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$, if

690: $p\wedge s$ decides\footnote{i.e.\ there is an $\alpha_s\in V$ such that

691:   $p\wedge s$ forces $\n\tau=\std \alpha_s$.}

692: $\n\tau$ for all $s\in\val(p,\mathord < n)$.  $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$,

693: if $p$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$ for some $n$.

694: 

695: So if $p$ essentially decides $\n\tau$, then we can calculate

696: the value of $\n\tau$ from a finite set of possible trunks of

697: $p$. So~\eqref{eq:gut} and~\eqref{eq:gorx} imply:

698: \begin{equation}\label{eq:y0}

699:   \text{If $p$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$, and $q\leq^* p$,

700:   then $q$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$.}

701: \end{equation}

702: We also get:

703: \begin{equation}\label{eq:y}

704:   \text{If $q\wedge s$ essentially decides $\n\tau$ for each

705:   $s\in\val(q,\mathord<n)$, then so does $q$.}

706: \end{equation}

707: 

708: 

709: We define the following (non-transitive) 

710: relations $\leq_n$ ($n\in\omega$) on $P$:

711: \begin{equation}

712:   \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

713:     \raggedright

714:     $q\leq_n p$ if

715:     $q\leq p$ and there is an $h\geq n$ such that

716:     $q\restriction h=p\restriction h$

717:     and $\nor(q(i))\geq n$ for all $i\geq h$.

718:   }

719: \end{equation}

720: (Cf.~Figure~\ref{fig:pq_new}(b) on page \pageref{fig:pq_new}).

721: 

722: \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:onedim}]

723: We will show the following properties:

724: \begin{itemize}

725:   \item $q\leq_0 p$ implies $q \leq p$, and $q\leq_{n+1} p$ implies $q\leq_n p$.

726:   \item {\em (Fusion.)}\/ 

727:     For every sequence $p_0\geq_0 p_1\geq_1 p_2\geq \dots$

728:     there is a $q$ stronger than each $p_n$.

729:   \item {\em (Pure decision.)}\/

730:      For every name $\n \tau$ of an ordinal, $n\in\omega$,

731:     and $p\in P$, there is a $q\leq_n p$ essentially deciding $\n\tau$.

732: \end{itemize}

733: 

734: Then the standard argument can be employed to 

735: show Theorem~\ref{thm:onedim}:

736: \begin{itemize}

737:   \item {\em $\omega\ho$-bounding:}

738:     Let $\n f$ be the name for

739:     a function from $\omega$ into ordinals and $p\in P$.

740:     Set $p_0=p$.

741:     If $p_n$ is already constructed, choose $p_{n+1}\leq_{n+1}p_n$

742:     essentially deciding $\n f(n)$. 

743:     Fuse the sequence into some $q$. Then modulo $q$ there

744:     are only finitely many possibilities for each $\n f(n)$.

745:   \item

746:   {\em Proper:}

747:     Let $N\esm H(\chi)$ be countable and contain $P$ and $p_0$.

748:     Let

749:     $(\n \tau_n)_{n\in\omega}$ list the

750:     $P$-names of ordinals that are in $N$.

751:     Choose (in $N$) $p_{n+1}\leq_n p_n$ such that $p_{n+1}$

752:     essentially decides $\n\tau_n$. If $q\leq p_n$ for all $n$,

753:     then $q$ is is $N$-generic.

754:   \item

755:   {\em The size of the continuum:}

756:     So for every $p$ in $P$ and $P$-name $\n r$ for a real

757:     there is a $q\leq p$ continuously reading $\n r$.

758:     This means that $\n r$ is calculated by a function 

759:     \[

760:       \text{eval}:\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\val(q,\mathord<n)\to 2^{<\omega}.

761:     \]

762:     (Since each $\n r(m)$ is determined by $\val(q,\mathord<M)$

763:     for some $M$.)

764:     There are only $2^{\al0}$ many such functions, and $|P|=2^{\al0}$ many

765:     conditions.

766: \end{itemize}

767: 

768: So we just have to show pure decision and fusion. Fusion is easy:

769: Let $(p_n)_{n\in\omega}$

770: satisfy $p_{n+1}\leq_{n+1} p_n$.

771: Set $q(n)=p_{n}(n)$. Then

772: $q$ is in $P$: Fix any $M\in\omega$. There

773: is an $h>M$ such that

774: \begin{equation}\label{eq:few}

775:   \nor(p_M(m))\geq M\text{ for all }m\geq h.

776: \end{equation}

777: Then~\eqref{eq:few} holds for $p_{M+1}$ as well,

778: and for each $p_k$ with $k>M$, and therefore for $q$. Clearly,

779: $q\leq p_n$ for each $n$.

780: 

781: It remains to be shown that $P$ satisfies

782: pure decision.

783: 

784: Let $\n\tau$ be the name of an ordinal.

785: 

786: {\bf The basic construction $S(p,M)$:}\\

787:   Assume that $\trunklg(p)=n$ and $M\in\omega$.

788:   We define $S(p,M)$ the following way, see Figure~\ref{fig:pbasic}:

789: 

790: \begin{figure}[tb]

791:   \begin{center}

792:     \newcommand{\mydecr}{$\mathord\geq \cdot-r$}

793:     \scalebox{0.4}{\input{puredecbasic.pstex_t}}

794:     \caption{\label{fig:pbasic} 

795:     The basic construction $S(p,M)$.}

796:   \end{center}

797: \end{figure}

798: 

799:   Enumerate $\val(p,\mathord\leq n)$ as $s^0,\dots,s^{l-1}$.

800:   So $l\leq \varphi(\mathord=n)$.

801:   Set $p^{-1}=p$. Given $p^k$, define $p^{k+1}\in P$ as follows:

802:   $\trunk(p^{k+1})=s^{k+1}$, $p^{k+1}\leq p^k\wedge s^{k+1}$,

803:   and there is an $h^{k+1}$ such that

804:   \begin{itemize}

805:     \item if $n<m<h^{k+1}$, then $\nor(p^{k+1}(m))\geq \nor(p^{k}(m))-r(m)$,

806:     \item if $m\geq h^{k+1}$, then $\nor(p^{k+1}(m))\geq M$,

807:   \end{itemize}

808:   and such that additionally one of the following two cases holds:%

809:   \begin{description}

810:     \item[dec]  $p^{k+1}$ essentially decides $\n\tau$, or

811:     \item[half] it is not possible to satisfy ``dec'' (for any

812:       choice of $h^{k+1}$),

813:       then $p^{k+1}(m)=\chalf(p^{k}(m))$ for all $m>n$.

814:   \end{description}

815:   This way we construct $p^k$ for each $0\leq k<l$.

816:   At each step $0\leq k<l$, we have one of the cases ``dec'' or ``half''.

817:   This gives a function $F: \val(p(n))\to \{\text{dec},\text{half}\}$,

818:   and we use bigness to thin out $p(n)$ and

819:   get some $\cd\in\cS(p(n))$ such that $F\restriction\val(\cd)$ is constant

820:   and $\nor(\cd)\geq \nor(p(n))-r(n)$.

821: 

822:   Note that in this construction we have to assume that 

823:   $\nor(p^{k}(m))>1$ for all $-1\leq k<l-1$ and $m>n$, otherwise we cannot 

824:   halve $p^{k}(m)$. Also, 

825:   $\nor(p(n))$ has to be bigger than $1$, otherwise we

826:   cannot use bigness. 

827:   Let $S(p,M)$ be undefined if these conditions are not met.

828:   Otherwise,

829:   we define $q=S(p,M)$ as follows: 

830:   \[

831:     q\restriction n=p\restriction n=\trunk(p),\quad

832:     q(n)=\cd,\quad q(m)=p^{l-1}(m)\text{ for }m>n.

833:   \]

834: 

835: 

836:   We call $q$ halving, if the constant value of $F\restriction \val(q(n))$ 

837:   is ``half''.

838:   We will show that $q$ cannot be halving. 

839: 

840:   If $q$ is not halving, i.e.\ if the constant value is ``dec'', then

841:   $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$: 

842:   If $s\in \val(q,\mathord\leq n)$, then $s=s^k$ for some $k<l$, and

843:   $q\wedge s\leq p^k$ essentially decides $\n\tau$.

844:   Now use~\eqref{eq:y}.

845: 

846:   {\bf Some properties of  $S(p,M)$:}\\

847:   If $q=S(p,M)$ is defined, then it satisfies the following:

848:   \begin{gather}

849:     \label{eq:qa} \nor(q(n))\geq \nor(p(n))-r(n).\\

850:     \label{eq:qb} \text{If $m>n$, then }\nor(q(m))\geq

851:       \min(M,\nor(p(m)))-\varphi(\mathord= n)\cdot r(m).\\

852:     \label{eq:dreizwei}\text{If $q$ is halving, then no $q'\leq q$ with

853:       trunk-length $n+1$ essentially decides $\n\tau$.}

854:   \end{gather}

855:   To see~\eqref{eq:dreizwei}, assume that $q'$

856:   is a counterexample.

857:   So $q'\leq q\wedge s^k\leq p^{k}$ for some 

858:   $0\leq k<l$, and $\nor(q'(m))>0$ 

859:   for all $m>n$. Since $q$ is halving,

860:   $p^{k}$ was produced by halving $p^{k-1}$. Pick an $h$ such that 

861:   $\nor(q'(m))>M$ for all $m\geq h$. For $n<m<h$,

862:   $p^{k}(m)=\chalf(p^{k-1}(m))$ and $q'(m)\in \cS(q(m))\subseteq

863:   \cS(p^{k}(m))$,

864:   so we can un-halve 

865:   $q'(m)$ to get some $\cd_m\in \cS(p^{k-1}(m))$

866:   with $\val(\cd_m)\subseteq \val(q'(m))$ and 

867:   $\nor(\cd_m)\geq \nor(p^{k-1}(m))-r(m)$.

868:   But then we could have chosen a deciding condition $r$ instead

869:   of $p^{k}$: Define $r(m)=\delta_m$ for $n<m<h$ and

870:   $r(m)=q'(m)$ otherwise.

871:   According to~\eqref{eq:gur},

872:   \mbox{$r\leq^* q$. \eqref{eq:y0}}

873:   implies that $r$ essentially decides

874:   $\n\tau$, a contradiction.

875: 

876:   {\bf $S(p,M)$ essentially decides:}\\

877:   We assume that $S(p,M)$ is halving and get a 

878:   contradiction the following way:

879:   We show that the ``successors'' of $q$ with

880:   increased stem have to be halving as well, and we 

881:   can fuse them into some $q^\omega$. But there will

882:   be a $q'\leq q^\omega$ deciding $\n\tau$, a contradiction.

883:   In more detail:

884:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:xy7}

885:     \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

886:       \raggedright If $\trunklg(p)=n$, $\nor(p(m))>3$ for all $m\geq n$ and if $M>3$,

887:         then $S(p,M)$ exists and is not halving.}

888:   \end{equation}

889:   Assume towards a contradiction that

890:   $S(p,M)$ is halving (or does not exist).

891:   Set $q^{n-1}=p$.

892:   Assume that for $k\geq n-1$, we have

893:   already defined  $q^k$. We set

894:   $M_k=M+k+1-n$ (note that $M_{n-1}=M$), and define $q^{k+1}$ the 

895:   following way:

896: 

897: %   and $q^n=q$.

898: %  Set $M_k=M+k+1-n$ for all $k$. So $M_{n-1}=M$.

899: %  Given $q^k$, we define $q^{k+1}$ the 

900: %  following way:

901: 

902:   List $\val(q^k,\mathord\leq k)$ as $s^0,\dots,s^{l-1}$. So

903:   $l\leq \varphi(\mathord \leq k)$.

904:   Set $r^{-1}=q^k$. Given $r^{i-1}$, 

905:   set 

906:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:rx}

907:     r^{i}=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,M_k)

908:   \end{equation}

909:   (if defined). So $r^i$ has trunk-length $k+1$.

910:   Define $q^{k+1}(m)$ to be $q^{k}(m)$ for $m\leq k$ and

911:   $r^{l-1}(m)$ otherwise.

912: 

913:   So in particular, $q^n=S(p,M)$.

914: 

915:   If $q^{k+1}$ is defined, then~\eqref{eq:qa} and~\eqref{eq:qb} imply:

916:   \begin{itemize}

917:     \item $q^{k+1}(m)=q^{k}(m)$ for $m\leq k$.

918:     \item $\nor(q^{k+1}(k+1))\geq \nor(q^{k}(k))-

919:                               \varphi(\mathord\leq k)\cdot r(k+1)$.

920:     \item $\nor(q^{k+1}(m))\geq \min(M_k,\nor(q^k(m)))-

921:                               \varphi(\mathord\leq k+1)\cdot r(m)$

922:       for $m>k+1$.

923:   \end{itemize}

924:   So in any case, we get for all $m\in\omega$

925:   \begin{align}

926:     \label{eq:qc}

927:       \nor(q^{k+1}(m))\geq&\min(M_k,\nor(q^k(m)))-

928:                          \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot r(m).

929:     \\\intertext{Iterating this $l$ many steps

930:       (note that $q^k(m)$ remains constant if $k\geq m$) we get for all $m$:}

931:     \label{eq:qf} 

932:       \nor(q^{k+l}(m))\geq & \min(M_k,\nor(q^k(m)))-\min(l,m-k)

933:       \cdot  \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot r(m),

934:     \\\intertext{and since $r(m)=1/(m\cdot \varphi(\mathord<m))$, we get}

935:     \label{eq:qg} 

936:       \nor(q^{k+l}(m))\geq & \min(M_k,\nor(q^k(m)))-1.

937:   \end{align}

938:   If we set $k=n-1$, this shows that

939:   $\nor(q^{k+l}(m))\geq 2$ for all $l\in\omega$,

940:   and that therefore $q^{k+l+1}$ is defined.

941:   Also, if we 

942:   define $q^\omega$ by $q^\omega(m)=q^m(m)$, then

943:   $q^\omega\in P$:

944:   Given $N\in\omega$, pick 

945:   $k$ such that $M_k>N+1$ and pick

946:   $h>k$ such that $\nor(q^k(m))>N+1$

947:   for all $m>h$. If $m>h$, i.e.\ $m=k+l$ for some $l>0$,

948:   then $q^\omega(m)=q^{k+l}(m)$,

949:   and $\nor(q^{k+l}(m))\geq \min(M_k, \nor(q^k(m))-1>N$.

950: 

951:   Also, $q^\omega\leq q^k$ for all $k\in\omega$.

952: 

953:   The property~\eqref{eq:dreizwei} of $S$ 

954:   can by induction be generalized to any $k\geq n$

955:   (recall that $q=S(p,M)=q^n$).

956:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:prop7}

957:     \text{No $q'\leq q^{k}$ with trunk-length $k+1$ essentially

958:       decides $\n\tau$.}

959:   \end{equation}

960:   For $k=n$ this is~\eqref{eq:dreizwei}. 

961:   We assume that~\eqref{eq:prop7} holds for $k$ and show it 

962:   for $k+1$. Assume $q'$ is a counterexample. $q'$ is

963:   stronger than some of the $r^i$ ($0\leq i<l$) used 

964:   in~\eqref{eq:rx} to construct $q^{k+1}$. 

965:   $r^i=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,M_k)$ has trunk-length $k+1$

966:   and is stronger than $q^k$, so

967:   we can apply~\eqref{eq:prop7} to see that $r^i$ cannot 

968:   essentially decide $\n\tau$. So $r^i$ is halving. 

969:   Using~\eqref{eq:dreizwei}, we see that no $q'\leq r^i$

970:   with trunk-length $k+2$ essentially decides $\n\tau$,

971:   a contradiction.

972: 

973: 

974:   On the other hand, there is a $q'\leq q^\omega$ deciding $\n\tau$.

975:   Set $k=\trunklg(q)-1$. Then $q'\leq q^\omega\leq q^k$

976:   contradicts~\eqref{eq:prop7}.

977: 

978:   {\bf Pure decision:}\\

979:   Given $p\in P$ and $M\in\omega$, pick

980:   $n$ such that $p(m)>M+5$ for all $m\geq n$.

981:   Similarly to above, enumerate $\val(p,\mathord<n)$

982:   as $s^0,\dots,s^{l-1}$, set $r^{-1}=p$ and $r^{k+1}=S(r^k\wedge s^{k+1},M+5)$.

983:   Define $q$ by $q\restriction n=p\restriction n$ and

984:   $q(m)=r^{l-1}(m)$ for $m\geq n$.

985:   Just as in~\eqref{eq:qc},

986:   $\nor(q(m))\geq \min(M+5,\nor(p(m)))-1> M+4$ for $m>n$, i.e.\ $q\leq_M p$.

987:   As we already know by~\eqref{eq:xy7}, each $r^k$ essentially

988:   decides $\n\tau$, so by~\eqref{eq:y},

989:   $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$ as well.

990: \end{proof}

991: 

992: 

993: A simple modification of the proof leads to a stronger property:

994: Using the same $\varphi$ and $r$ as in the previous theorem, we get:

995: \begin{Thm}

996:   Assume that $g:\omega\to\omega\setminus 1$ is 

997:   monotonously increasing, that $\n\nu$ is a $P$-name 

998:   and that $p\in P$ forces that $\n\nu(n)<g(n)$ for all $n$.

999:   If each $\cK(n)$ is $(g(n)+1,r(n))$-big and $r(n)$-halving,

1000:   then there is a $q\leq p$ which 

1001:   $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\nu(n)$ for all $n$.

1002: \end{Thm}

1003: We call this phenomenon {\em rapid reading}.

1004: 

1005: 

1006: \begin{proof}

1007:   We modify the last proof in the following way:

1008: 

1009:   {\em The basic construction $S(p,l,M)$:}

1010:   We again assume that $n=\trunklg(p)$, and use the notation

1011:   $S(p,l,M)$ (for $l\leq n$)

1012:   for the same construction as $S(p,M)$, where 

1013:   we set $\n\tau=\n\nu(l)$, and

1014:   instead of trying to {\em essentially} decide $\n\tau$,

1015:   we try to {\em decide} it.

1016:   So 

1017:   instead of the two cases ``dec'' and ``half'', we get 

1018:   $g(l)+1$ many cases: ``0'', \dots, ``$g(l)-1$'', and

1019:   (if none of these cases can be satisfied) ``half''.

1020:   Since $l\leq n$ and $g$ is increasing, we can use

1021:   $(g(n)+1,r(n))$-bigness instead of just

1022:   $(2,r(n))$-bigness, and we again get a homogeneous $\cd$.

1023:   If $S(p,l,M)$ is not halving, then it decides $\n\nu(l)$.

1024: 

1025:   {\em Some properties of  $S(p,l,M)$:}

1026:   We again get~\eqref{eq:qa} and~\eqref{eq:qb}, and in~\eqref{eq:dreizwei}

1027:   we replace ``essentially decides $\n\tau$'' with

1028:   ``decides $\n\nu(l)$'', i.e.\ we get:

1029:   \begin{equation*}

1030:     \text{If $q$ is halving,

1031:     then no $q'\leq q$ with trunk-length $n+1$ decides $\n\nu(l)$.}

1032:   \end{equation*}

1033: 

1034:   {\em $S(p,l,M)$ decides:} We again construct $q^k$, each time trying to

1035:   decide $\n\tau=g(l)$ (independently of $k$). 

1036:   So~\eqref{eq:rx} now reads:

1037:   \begin{equation*}

1038:     r^i=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,l,M_k).

1039:   \end{equation*}

1040:   (Here we only need $(g(l)+1,r(k))$-bigness). 

1041:   Again we get~\eqref{eq:qg}, and  therefore

1042:   each $q^k$ (and $q^\omega$) is

1043:   defined, and~\eqref{eq:prop7} now tells us

1044:   \begin{equation*}

1045:     \text{No $q'\leq q^{k}$ with trunk-length $k+1$ decides 

1046:   $\n\tau$.}

1047:   \end{equation*}

1048:   But there is some $q'\leq q^\omega$ deciding $\n\tau$,

1049:   a contradiction.

1050: 

1051:   So far we know the following: 

1052:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:gube7}

1053:     \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

1054:       \raggedright If $\trunklg(p)=n$, $\nor(p(m))>3$ for $m\geq n$, and $M>3$,

1055:       then $S(p,n,M)$ exists and decides $\n\nu(n)$.}

1056:   \end{equation}

1057:   {\em Rapid reading:}

1058:   Instead of the part on {\em pure decision}, we proceed as follows:

1059:   Given $p\in P$, we can assume (by enlarging the stem)

1060:   that 

1061:   $\nor(p(m))>5$ for all $m>\trunklg(p)$.

1062:   We set $k_0=\trunklg(p)-1$ and

1063:   $q^{k_0}=p'$.

1064:   We now construct $q^k$ and $q^\omega$ just as above, but this 

1065:   time using 

1066:   \begin{equation*}

1067:     r^{i}=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,k+1,M_k).

1068:   \end{equation*} 

1069:   As in~\eqref{eq:qg} we see that $r^i$, $q^k$ and $q^\omega$ exist.

1070:   $r^i$ has sufficient norm and trunk-length $k+1$, so by~\eqref{eq:gube7}

1071:   each $r^i$ 

1072:   decides $\n \nu(k+1)$. This implies that $q^{k+1}$ (and therefore

1073:   $q^\omega$ as well) $\mathord\leq k$-decides $\n \nu(k+1)$.

1074: \end{proof}

1075: 

1076: Note that $P$ has size continuum, and in particular it is

1077: $(2^{\al0})^+$-cc. Together with proper, that gives us:

1078: \begin{Lem}

1079:   Under CH and the assumptions of

1080:   Theorem~\ref{thm:onedim}, $P$ preserves all cardinals (and cofinalities)

1081:   and the size of the continuum.

1082: \end{Lem}

1083: 

1084: \section{decisiveness, properness of finite products}\label{sec:decisive}

1085: 

1086: In this section, we fix a {\em finite\/} set $I$

1087: and for every $i\in I$ a

1088: creating pair $(\cK_i,\cS_i)$.

1089: 

1090: The product forcing $\prod_{i\in I} \Qsu(\cK_i,\cS_i)$ is equivalent to

1091: $\Qsu(\cK_I,\cS_I)$, where the creating pair $(\cK_I,\cS_I)$

1092: is defined as follows:

1093: An $n$-creature $\cc\in\cK_I(n)$

1094: corresponds to an $|I|$-tuple $(\cc_i)_{i\in I}$ such that

1095: $\cc_i\in \cK_i(n)$.

1096: $\val(\cc)=\prod_{i\in I}\val(\cc_i)$,

1097: $\nor(\cc)=\min(\{\nor(\cc_i):\, i\in I\})$, and

1098: $\cd=(\cd_i)_{i\in I}$ is in $\cS(\cc)$ if

1099: $\cd_i\in\cS(\cc_i)$ for all $i\in I$.\footnote{So

1100: an $n$-creature ``lives'' on the product $\prod_{i\in I}[\bfF _i(n),\bfF _i(n+1)-1]$. This does not fit our restrictive framework, so we could

1101: just ``linearize'' the product. Assume $I\in\omega$, i.e.\ $I=\{0,\dots,I-1\}$.

1102: Set

1103: $\bfF _I(n)\DEFEQ\sum_{i\in I} \bfF _i(n)$ and write it in the following way:\\

1104: \setlength{\unitlength}{5mm}

1105: \newlength{\mul}\setlength{\mul}{0.9\unitlength}

1106: \centerline{\begin{picture}(23,2)(-1,-1.2)

1107: %

1108: \put( 0,0){\line(1,0){21}}

1109: %

1110: \put( 0,-0.5){\line(0,1){1.0}}

1111: \put(0,-1){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\bfF _I(0)$}}

1112: %

1113: \put( 3,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

1114: \put( 1.5,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\underbrace{\hspace{3\mul}}_{\bfF _0(1)}$}}

1115: %

1116: \put( 5,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

1117: \put( 4,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\underbrace{\hspace{2\mul}}_{\bfF _1(1)}$}}

1118: %

1119: \put( 7,-0.5){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize \dots}}

1120: %

1121: \put( 9,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

1122: \put( 11,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\underbrace{\hspace{4\mul}}_{\bfF _{I-1}(1)}$}}

1123: %

1124: \put( 13,-0.5){\line(0,1){1.0}}

1125: \put( 13,-1){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\bfF _I(1)$}}

1126: %

1127: \put( 16,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

1128: \put( 14.5,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $\underbrace{\hspace{3\mul}}_{\bfF _0(2)}$}}

1129: %

1130: \put( 18,-0.5){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize \dots}}

1131: \end{picture}}

1132: Now it should be clear how to formally define $\bfH_I$, $\cK_I$, $\cS_I$ etc.}

1133: 

1134: 

1135: If each $\cK_i(n)$ is $r$-halving, then $\cK_I(n)$ is $r$-halving as well: 

1136: We can set $\chalf(\cc)\DEFEQ (\chalf(\cc_i))_{i\in I}$.  This satisfies 

1137: Definition~\ref{def:big} of halving: Assume that  $\cd\in\cS( \chalf(\cc))$ and

1138: $\nor(\cd)>0$. So $\cd=(\cd_i)_{i\in I}$, $\cd_i\in \cS(\cc_i)$, and

1139: $\nor(\cd_i)>0$ for all $i\in I$.  We can un-halve each $\cd_i$

1140: to some $\cd'_i$, and set $\cd'=(\cd'_i)_{i\in I}$. Then

1141: $\cd'$ is as required.

1142: 

1143: However, $\cK_I$ will not satisfy bigness, since  a function

1144: $F:\prod_{i\in I}\val(\cc_i)\to 2$ can generally not be

1145: written as a product of functions $F_i:\val(\cc_i)\to 2$.

1146: So to handle bigness we have to introduce a new notion:

1147: 

1148: \begin{Def} Let $0<r\leq 1$, $B,K,n>0$.

1149:   \begin{itemize}

1150:   \item $\cc$ is hereditarily $(B,r)$-big, if every $\cd\in \cSc$

1151:     with $\nor(\cd)>1$ is $(B,r)$-big.

1152:   \item $\cc$ is $(K,n,r)$-decisive, if

1153:     there are $\cd^-,\cd^+\in \cSc$

1154:     such that\\ $\nor(\cd^-),\nor(\cd^+)\geq \nor(\cc)-r$,

1155:     $\card{\val(\cd^-)}\leq K$ and $\cd^+$ is hereditarily

1156:     $(2^{K^n},r)$-big.\\

1157:     $\cd^-$ is called a $K${\em -small successor}, and

1158:     $\cd^+$ a $K${\em-big successor} of $\cc$.

1159:   \item $\cc$ is $(n,r)$-decisive if $\cc$ is $(K,n,r)$-decisive for some $K$.

1160: %  \item $\cc$ is hereditarily $(n,r)$-decisive if every $\cd\in\cSc$

1161: %        with $\nor(\cd)>1$ is $(n,r)$-decisive.

1162:   \item $\cK(n)$ is  $(n,r)$-decisive if every $\cc\in \cK(n)$ with

1163:     $\nor(\cc)>1$ is  $(n,r)$-decisive.

1164:   \end{itemize}

1165: \end{Def}

1166: 

1167: An example for decisive, halving creatures can be found in Section~\ref{sec:example}.

1168: 

1169: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:increasebigness}

1170:   \begin{enumerate}

1171:     \item

1172:       If $\cc$ is $(n,r)$-decisive

1173:       (i.e.\ $\cc$ is $(K_0,n,r)$-decisive for {\bf some} $K_0$),

1174:       then for {\bf every} $K\in\omega$ there is 

1175:       {\bf either} a $K$-big successor

1176:       {\bf or} a $K$-small successor of $\cc$.

1177:     \item

1178:       If $\cc$ is $(K,n,r)$-decisive and hereditarily $(B,r)$-big,

1179:       and if $\nor(\cc)>1+r$, then $B<K$.

1180:     \item

1181:       Assume that $\cK(n)$ is $(n,r)$-decisive and

1182:       $(B,r)$-big for some $B\geq 1$, that $\delta\in\omega$

1183:       and that $\nor(\cc)>1+\delta\cdot r$.

1184:       Then there is a hereditarily $(\EXP(B,n,\delta),r)$-big $\cd\in\cSc$ such

1185:       that $\nor(\cd)\geq \nor(\cc)-\delta\cdot r$, where

1186:       $\EXP(B,n,0)=B$ and $\EXP(B,n,m+1)=2^{\EXP(B,n,m)^n}$.

1187:     \item In particular, if $\cK(n)$ is $(n,r)$-decisive and

1188:       $\nor(\cc)>1+r$, then there is a hereditarily $(2,r)$-big

1189:       $\cd\in\cS(\cc)$ such that $\nor(\cd)\geq \nor(\cc)-r$.

1190:     \item We can avoid small sets without decreasing the

1191:       norm too much: Assume that $\cK(n)$ is $(n,r)$-decisive and

1192:       $(B,r)$-big for some $B\geq 1$, that $\delta\in\omega$

1193:       and that $\nor(\cc)>1+(\delta+1)\cdot r$.

1194:       If $X\subseteq \val(\cc)$ has size less than $\EXP(B,n,\delta)$,

1195:       then there is a $\cd\in\cSc$ such that 

1196:       $\nor(\cd)\geq \nor(\cc)-(\delta+1)\cdot r$ and

1197:       $\val(\cd)$ is disjoint to $X$.

1198:   \end{enumerate}

1199: \end{Lem}

1200: 

1201: \begin{proof}

1202:   (1): If $K\leq K_0$, use $\cd^-$, otherwise use $\cd^+$.

1203:   (2): The $K$-small successor $\cd^-$ is $B$-big, and $|\val(\cd^-)|<K$.

1204:   Now use~\eqref{eq:valbig}.

1205:   (3): Set $\cd^+_0=\cc$. Assume that $\cd^+_i$

1206:   is defined and has norm bigger than 1. So

1207:   $\cd^+_i$ is decisive, i.e.\ there is a $K_i$ and

1208:   a $K_i$-small successor $\cd^-_{i+1}$ and

1209:   a $K_i$-big successor $\cd^+_{i+1}$. According to

1210:   (2), $K_0>B$, and $K_{i+1}>2^{K_i^n}\geq \EXP(B,n,i+1)$.

1211:   In particular, 

1212:   $\cd^+_\delta$ is hereditarily $\EXP(B,n,\delta)$-big. 

1213:   (4): Every creature is $(1,r)$-big.

1214:   (5) follows from (3): First get a $(\EXP(B,n,\delta),r)$-big

1215:   creature $\cd_0$, then use the function $F$ that maps 

1216:   $\val{\cd_0}$ to $X\cup\{\text{\tt NotInX}\}$ and thin

1217:   out $\cd_0$ to get an $F$-homogeneous $\cd$.

1218: \end{proof}

1219: 

1220: We now show by induction on $k$: If the $n$-creatures are $(k,r)$-decisive, then we can

1221: generalize bigness to $k$-tuples.

1222: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:decisive}  Assume that $k,m,t\geq 1$, $0<r\leq 1$,

1223:   $\cc_0,\dots,\cc_{k-1}\in \cK(n)$ and $F$ satisfy the following:

1224:   \begin{itemize}

1225:   \item $\nor(\cc_i)>1+r\cdot (k-1)$,

1226:   \item $\cK(n)$ is $(k,r)$-decisive and each $\cc_i$ is hereditarily

1227:     $(2^{m^t},r)$-big, and

1228:   \item $F$ is a function from $\prod_{i\in k} \val(\cc_i)$ to $2^{m^t}$.

1229:   \end{itemize}

1230:   Then there are $\cd_0,\dots,\cd_{k-1}\in \cK$ such that

1231:   \begin{itemize}

1232:   \item $\cd_i\in\cS(\cc_i)$,

1233:   \item $\nor(\cd_i)\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r\cdot k$, and

1234:   \item $F\restriction \prod_{i\in k} \val(\cd_i)$ is constant.

1235:   \end{itemize}

1236: \end{Lem}

1237: 

1238: 

1239: 

1240: \begin{proof}

1241:   The case $k=1$ follows directly from Definition~\ref{def:big} of

1242:   $(2^{m^t},r)$-big (decisive is not needed).

1243:   So assume the lemma holds for $k$, and let us investigate the case $k+1$.

1244: 

1245:   $\cc_k$ is $(k+1,r)$-decisive, i.e.\ there is an $M$ such that

1246:   $\cc_k$ is $(M,k+1,r)$-decisive. So~\ref{lem:increasebigness}(2) implies

1247:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:Mx}

1248:     M>2^{m^t}.

1249:   \end{equation}

1250:   According to~\ref{lem:increasebigness}(1), for 

1251:   each $\cc_i$ ($i<k$) we can pick some $\cd_i$ that is either 

1252:   an $M$-small successor or an $M$-big successor of $\cc_i$ (since each

1253:   $\cc_i$ is $(k+1,r)$-decisive).

1254:   If $\cd_0$ is $M$-small, then we let

1255:   $\cd_k$ be the $M$-big successor of $\cc_k$, otherwise

1256:   the $M$-small one. (For $\cc_k$ we have both options, since 

1257:   $\cc_k$ is $(M,k+1,r)$-decisive.)

1258: 

1259:   This gives a sequence $(\cd_i)_{i\in k+1}$ satisfying $\cd_i\in

1260:   \cS(\cc_i)$ and $\nor(\cd_i)\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r$.

1261:   Set $S\DEFEQ\{i\in k+1:\, \cd_i \text{ is }M\text{-small}\}$, and

1262:   $L\DEFEQ (k+1)\setminus S$.  

1263:   So $\{L,S\}$ is a non-trivial partition of $k+1$, since

1264:   $0$ and $k$ are in different sets.

1265:   If $i\in S$, then $|\val(\cd_i)|<M$, if $i\in L$ then

1266:   $\cd_i$  is hereditarily $2^{M^{k+1}}$-big.

1267: 

1268:   Set $Y\DEFEQ \prod_{i\in S}\val(\cd_i)$. $\card{Y}\leq M^{\card{S}}$.

1269:   So we

1270:   can write $Y$ as $\{y_1,\dots ,y_{M^{\card{S}}}\}$.

1271: 

1272:   Define $F^*$ on $\prod_{i\in L}\val(\cd_i)$ by

1273:   \[

1274:     F^*(x)\DEFEQ (F(x^\frown y_1),\dots,

1275:     F(x^\frown y_{M^{\card{S}}})).

1276:   \]

1277:   So (using~\eqref{eq:Mx} for the last inequality) we get:

1278:   \[

1279:     \card{\image(F^*)}\leq

1280:     \card{\image(F)}^{M^{\card{S}}}\leq 2^{m^t M^{\card{S}}}<

1281:     2^{M^{\card{S}+1}}.

1282:   \]

1283: 

1284:   For $i\in L$, $\cd_i$ is hereditarily $2^{M^{k+1}}$-big

1285:   and therefore $2^{M^{|S|+1}}$-big, and $|L|\leq k$.

1286:   Therefore we can apply the induction hypothesis to $k'\DEFEQ \card{L}$,

1287:   $m'\DEFEQ M$, $t'\DEFEQ \card{S}+1$,

1288:   $F'\DEFEQ F^*$ and $\cc'_i\DEFEQ \cd_i$ for $i\in L$.

1289:   This gives us $(\cd'_i)_{i\in L}$ such that

1290:   \begin{itemize}

1291:   \item $\cd'_i\in\cS(\cd_i)\subseteq \cS(\cc_i)$,

1292:   \item $\nor(\cd'_i)\geq

1293:     \nor(\cd_i)-r\cdot k'\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r(k+1)$, and

1294:   \item $F^*\restriction \prod_{i\in L}\val(\cd'_i)$ is constant, say

1295:     $(F^{**}(y_1),\dots,F^{**}(y_{M^{\card{S}}}))$.

1296:   \end{itemize}

1297:   $F^{**}$ is a function from $Y=\prod_{i\in S}\val(\cd_i)$ to $2^{m^t}$.

1298:   Now we apply the induction hypothesis again, this time to

1299:   $k''\DEFEQ \card{S}<k+1$, $m''\DEFEQ m$,

1300:   $t''=t$, $F''\DEFEQ F^{**}$, and $\cc''_i\DEFEQ \cd_i$ for $i\in S$.

1301:   This gives us $(\cd'_i)_{i\in S}$ such that

1302:   \begin{itemize}

1303:   \item $\cd'_i\in\cS(\cd_i)\subseteq \cS(\cc_i)$,

1304:   \item $\nor(\cd'_i)\geq \nor(\cd_i)-r\cdot k''\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r(k+1)$, and

1305:   \item $F^{**}\restriction \prod_{i\in S}\val(\cd'_i)$ is constant.

1306:   \end{itemize}

1307:   Then $(\cd'_i)_{i\leq k}$ is as required.

1308: \end{proof}

1309: 

1310: 

1311: According to~\ref{lem:increasebigness}(3), we

1312: can increase the hereditary bigness by decreasing the norm.

1313: So we get (again setting 

1314:       $\EXP(B,n,0)=B$ and $\EXP(B,n,m+1)=2^{\EXP(B,n,m)^n}$):

1315: \begin{Cor}\label{cor:biggerbigness}

1316:   Fix $\delta\geq 1$.

1317:   Assume that $k\geq 1$, $0<r\leq 1$,

1318:   $\cK(n)$ is $(k,r)$-decisive and $(B,r)$-big,

1319:   $\nor(\cc_i)>1+r\cdot (\delta+k-1)$ for $0\leq i < k$

1320:   and  $F: \prod_{i\in k} \val(\cc_i)\to \EXP(B,k,\delta)$.

1321:   Then there are $\cd_i\in \cS(\cc_i)$ with $F$-homogeneous product

1322:   such that $\nor(\cd_i)\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r\cdot (\delta+k)$.

1323: \end{Cor}

1324: 

1325: \begin{proof}

1326:   By first decreasing the norms by at most $\delta\cdot r$,

1327:   we can assume that each $\cc_i$ is hereditary 

1328:   $\EXP(B,k,\delta)$-big.

1329:   Now use Lemma~\ref{lem:decisive}.

1330:   (Note that $\EXP(B,n,\delta)$ is of the form $2^{m^t}$ for some $m$ and $t$.) 

1331: \end{proof}

1332: 

1333: Every creature is $(1,r)$-big, and $\EXP(1,n,1)=2$. So we 

1334: get for $\delta=1$:

1335: \begin{Cor}\label{cor:multidimbignesssimple}

1336:   Assume that $k\geq 1$, $0<r\leq 1$,

1337:   $\cK(n)$ is $(k,r)$-decisive,

1338:   $\nor(\cc_i)>1+r\cdot k$ for $0\leq i < k$

1339:   and $F: \prod_{i\in k} \val(\cc_i)\to 2$.

1340:   Then there are $F$-homogeneous $\cd_i\in \cS(\cc_i)$ such that

1341:   $\nor(\cd_i)\geq \nor(\cc_i)-r\cdot (k+1)$.

1342: \end{Cor}

1343: 

1344: 

1345: In other words:  If we assume that $\cK_i(n)$ is 

1346: $(\card{I},r)$-decisive for all $i\in I$, then every

1347: $\cc\in\cK_I(n)$ with $\nor(\cc)>1+r\cdot |I|$

1348: is $(2,r\cdot(|I|+1))$-big.

1349: 

1350: In particular, we get pure decision for the finite product:

1351: \begin{Cor}

1352:   Set $\varphi(\mathord< n)\DEFEQ \prod_{i\in I}\prod_{m <\bfF_i (n)}\bfH_i(m)$,

1353:   and $r(n)\DEFEQ 1/(n\varphi(\mathord< n))$.

1354:   Assume that for all $i\in I$ and $n\in\omega$,

1355:   $\cK_i(n)$ is

1356:   $(\card{I},r(n))$-decisive

1357:   and $r(n)$-halving.

1358:   Then $\prod_{i\in I} \Qsu(\cK_i,\cS_i)$

1359:   is $\omega\ho$-bounding and proper and preserves the size of the continuum.

1360:   Under CH, $\prod_{i\in I} \Qsu(\cK_i,\cS_i)$ is $\al2$-cc and

1361:   preserves all cardinals.

1362: \end{Cor}

1363: 

1364: \begin{proof}

1365:   $\prod_{i\in I} \Qsu(\cK_i,\cS_i)=\Qsu(\cK_I,\cS_I)$.

1366:   $\cK_I(n)$  is $r(n)$-halving and $(2,r(n)\cdot (|I|+1))$-big according to

1367:   Corollary~\ref{cor:multidimbignesssimple}.

1368:   (Actually we get bigness only for creatures

1369:   with norm bigger than $1+r\cdot |I|$ instead of $1$.)

1370:   Now use Theorem~\ref{thm:onedim} and the Note following it.

1371:   Note that $\prod_{i\in I} \Qsu(\cK_i,\cS_i)$ has size $2^\al0$.

1372: \end{proof}

1373: 

1374: Remark:

1375:     Decisiveness is quite costly: To be able to apply the

1376:     last corollary, we will have to make the $n$-th level 

1377:     much larger than levels before,

1378:     i.e.

1379:     \[

1380:       \prod_{F_i(n)\leq m<F_i(n+1)}\bfH_i(m)\gg \prod_{j\in I}\prod_{m<F_i(n)}\bfH_j(m)

1381:     \]

1382:     for all $i\in I$.

1383:     In our application this will have the effect that

1384:     we can separate $(f,g)$ and $(f',g')$ only if their growth rates

1385:     are considerably different. It is very likely that with a more careful

1386:     and technically more complicated analysis one can construct

1387:     forcings that can separate cardinal invariants for pairs that

1388:     are not so far apart, but this would need other concepts than

1389:     decisiveness.

1390: 

1391: \section{A variant of the countable support product}\label{sec:product}

1392: 

1393: We now define $P$, a variant of the countable support product of lim-inf

1394: creature forcings. We want to end up with a forcing notion that also satisfies

1395: fusion, pure decision and $\al2$-cc (under CH).  This will give preservation of

1396: all cardinals. We will also need rapid reading of names.

1397: 

1398: Let $I$ be the index set of the product. We will use $\alpha$ and $\beta$ for

1399: elements of $I$.

1400: \begin{Asm}\label{asm:I}

1401:   Fix a set $I$ and for every $\alpha\in I$,

1402:   a creating pair $(\cK_\alpha,\cS_\alpha)$.

1403:   We assume that for each $n$ there is an upper bound $m(n)$

1404:   for $\card{\prod_{\bfF _\alpha(n)\leq i<\bfF _\alpha(n+1)}\bfH_\alpha(i)}$,

1405:   and set \mbox{$\varphi(\mathord=n)\DEFEQ m(n)^n$},

1406:   $\varphi(\mathord\leq n)\DEFEQ \prod_{m\leq n}\varphi(\mathord=m)$

1407:   and $\varphi(\mathord< n)\DEFEQ \prod_{m<n}\varphi(\mathord=m)$.

1408: \end{Asm}

1409: 

1410: We define the set $P$ in the following way:

1411: \begin{Def}

1412:   A condition $p$ in $P$ consists of a countable 

1413:   subset $\dom(p)$ of $I$, of objects $p(\alpha,n)$ for $\alpha\in \dom(p)$, 

1414:   $n\in\omega$, and of a function $\trunklg(p):\dom(p)\to \omega$  

1415:   satisfying the following ($\alpha\in\dom(p)$): 

1416:   \begin{itemize}

1417:     \item

1418:       If $n<\trunklg(p,\alpha)$, then

1419:       $p(\alpha,n)\in \prod_{\bfF_\alpha(n)\leq i<\bfF_\alpha(n+1)}(\bfH_\alpha(i))$.

1420:       \\

1421:       $\bigcup_{n<\trunklg(p)}p(\alpha,n)$ is called trunk of $p$ at $\alpha$.

1422:     \item

1423:       If $n\geq \trunklg(p,\alpha)$, then $p(\alpha,n)\in \cK_\alpha(n)$

1424:       and $\nor(p(\alpha,n))>0$.

1425:     \item

1426:       $\card{\supp(p,n)}<n$ for all $n>0$,

1427:       where we set

1428:       \[

1429:         \supp(p,n)\DEFEQ \{\alpha\in\dom(p):\, \trunklg(p,\alpha)\leq n\}.

1430:       \]

1431:     \item

1432:       Moreover, $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(\card{\supp(p,n)}/n)=0$.

1433:     \item

1434:       $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(\min(\{\nor(p(\alpha,n)):\, \alpha\in\supp(p,n)\}))= \infty$.

1435:   \end{itemize}

1436: \end{Def}

1437: So in particular, 

1438: for $\alpha\in\dom(p)$ the sequence $(p(\alpha,n))_{n\in\omega}$

1439: is in $\Qsu(\cK_\alpha,\cS_\alpha)$.

1440: 

1441: Note that now there is an essential difference between a part $t$ of the

1442: trunk and creature $\cc$ with $\val(\cc)=\{t\}$: The trunks do not prevent the

1443: minimum of the norms at height $h$ to be large.

1444: 

1445: \begin{uRems}

1446:   \begin{itemize}

1447:     \item For the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}, we will additionally fix a

1448:       function $\trunklg^\text{min}:I\to\omega$ and add the following

1449:       requirement to the definition of $P$:

1450:       \[

1451:         \trunklg(p,\alpha)\geq \trunklg^\text{min}(\alpha).

1452:       \]

1453:       This does not change any of the following properties of $P$ (or their

1454:       proofs).

1455:     \item

1456:       For the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:uncountable}, we will define the forcing

1457:       $R$ so that a condition $p$ picks for each $\alpha\in\dom(p)$ one of

1458:       several possibilities for a creating pair $(\cK_\alpha,\cS_\alpha)$.  It

1459:       turns out that this does not change anything either, apart from the fact

1460:       that $R_\epsilon$ is not a complete subforcing of $R$ any

1461:       more, i.e.\ Lemma~\ref{lem:Pjot} fails. Lemma~\ref{lem:cc}

1462:       still holds but needs a new proof. The rest of the proofs still

1463:       work without changes.

1464:   \end{itemize}

1465: \end{uRems}

1466:  

1467: As outlined, we have to modify the order usually used in the product:

1468: \begin{Def}

1469:   $q\leq p$ if

1470:   \begin{itemize}

1471:     \item $\dom(q)\supseteq \dom(p)$,

1472:     \item if $\alpha\in\dom(p)$ and $n\in\omega$,

1473:       then $q(\alpha,n)\in\cS(p(\alpha,n))$,

1474:     \item $\trunklg(q,\alpha)= \trunklg(p,\alpha)$ for

1475:           all but finitely many $\alpha\in\dom(p)$.

1476:   \end{itemize}

1477: \end{Def}

1478: Note that $q\leq p$ implies that then $\trunklg(q,\alpha)\geq

1479: \trunklg(p,\alpha)$ for all $\alpha\in\dom(p)$.

1480: 

1481: \begin{figure}[tb]

1482:   \begin{center}

1483:     \scalebox{0.25}{\input{prod_pgtq_new.pstex_t}}

1484:     \caption{\label{fig:prod_pgtq}  $q\leq p$, $s\leq_M p$, $r\leq^\text{new}_M p$.}

1485:   \end{center}

1486: \end{figure}

1487: 

1488: Figure~\ref{fig:prod_pgtq}

1489: shows one way to visualize $q\leq p$.

1490: 

1491: 

1492: 

1493: If $I$ is finite then

1494: $P$ is just the product $\prod_{\alpha\in I}\Qsu(\cK_\alpha,\cS_\alpha)$.

1495: 

1496: 

1497: For every $\alpha\in I$, $P$ adds a generic real $\n\eta_\alpha$, defined as

1498: the union of the trunks of $p$ at $\alpha$ for $p$ in the generic filter. 

1499: It is easy to see that $\n\eta_\alpha$ is forced to be different from

1500: $\n\eta_\beta$ for $\alpha\neq \beta$. Once again, the sequence

1501: $(\n\eta_\alpha)_{\alpha\in I}$ does not determine the generic filter.

1502: 

1503: Conditions with disjoint domains are compatible:

1504: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:cc}

1505:   (CH) $P$ is $\al2$-cc.

1506: \end{Lem}

1507: \begin{proof}

1508:   Assume towards a contradiction that $A$ is an antichain of size

1509:   $\al2$. Without loss of generality, $(\dom(a))_{a\in A}$

1510:   forms a $\Delta$-system with root $u$.

1511:   There are at most $2^{\al0}$ many possibilities for

1512:   $a\restriction u$, so without loss of generality,

1513:   $p\restriction u=q\restriction u$ for all $p,q\in A$.

1514:   Then $p$ and $q$ are compatible:

1515:   The function $x(n)=|\supp(p,n)\cup \supp(q,n)|/n$ converges

1516:   to $0$. So there is an $h$ such that $x(m)<1$ for all $m\geq h$.

1517:   Construct $r$ from $p\cup q$ by enlarging the (finitely many)

1518:   trunks at $\supp(q,h)\cup \supp(p,h)$ to height $h$. Then $r\in P$ and

1519:   $r\leq p,q$.

1520: \end{proof}

1521: 

1522: 

1523: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:Pjot}

1524:   If $J\subseteq I$, then

1525:   $P_{J}=\{p\in P:\, \dom(p)\subseteq J\}$ is a

1526:   complete subforcing of $P$.

1527: \end{Lem}

1528: 

1529: \begin{proof}

1530:   If $p\in P$, then $p\restriction J\in P_J$, and

1531:   $q\leq_P p$ implies $q\restriction J\leq_{P_J} p\restriction J$.

1532:   So if $p\incomp_{P_J} q$, then $p\incomp_P q$.

1533:   Also, $p\restriction J$ is a reduction of $p$:

1534:   If $q\leq_{P_J} p\restriction J$, 

1535:   then we can again enlarge finitely many stems

1536:   of $q\cup p\restriction (I\setminus J)$ to get a condition $r\in P$ which

1537:   is stronger than both $p$ and $q$.

1538: \end{proof}

1539: 

1540: \begin{Def}

1541:   \begin{itemize}

1542:     \item $\prodval(p,\mathord< n)\DEFEQ \prod_{\alpha\in\dom(p)}\prod_{

1543:       m<n}\val(p(\alpha,m))$. 

1544:       The size of this set is at most $\varphi(\mathord<n)$.

1545:       $\prodval(p,\mathord\leq n)\DEFEQ\prodval(p,<(n+1))$.

1546:     \item If $w\subseteq \dom(p)$ and

1547:       $t\in \prod_{\alpha\in w}\prod_{0\leq

1548:           m<\bfF_\alpha(n)}\bfH_\alpha(m)$, then

1549:           $p\wedge t$ is defined by

1550:           \[

1551:             (p\wedge t)(\alpha,m)=

1552:         \begin{cases}

1553:           t_\alpha\restriction [\bfF_\alpha(m),\bfF_\alpha(m+1)-1]  

1554:              & \text{if }m<n\text{ and }\alpha\in w,\\

1555:           p(\alpha,m) & \text{otherwise.}

1556:         \end{cases}

1557:       \]

1558:       So $p\wedge t\in P$, and

1559:           if $t\in \prodval(p,\mathord<n)$, then $p\wedge t\leq p$.

1560:     \item If $\n\tau$ is a name of an ordinal, then

1561:           $p$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$, if  $p\wedge t$

1562:           decides $\n\tau$ for all

1563:           $t\in \prodval(p,\mathord< n)$. $p$ essentially

1564:           decides $\n\tau$, if $p$ $\mathord<n$-decides $\n\tau$

1565:           for some $n$.

1566:   \end{itemize}

1567: \end{Def}

1568: 

1569: As in the one-dimensional case we get:

1570: \begin{Facts}\label{fact:variousfacts}

1571:   \begin{enumerate}

1572:     \item

1573:       $\{p\wedge t:\, t\in\prodval(p,\mathord<n)\}$ is predense under $p$

1574:       (for $p\in P$ and $n\in\omega$).

1575:     \item $p\wedge t\, \forc\, \varphi$\text{ iff } $p\,\forc\,

1576:         [(\forall \alpha\in\dom(t))\, t(\alpha)<\n\eta_\alpha\, \rightarrow\,

1577:         \varphi]$.

1578:     \item Assume that $q'$ is the result of replacing finitely

1579:         many creatures $\cc$ of $q$ by creatures $\cd$ with

1580:         $\val(\cd)\subseteq \val(\cc)$. Then $q'\leq^* q$.\footnote{%

1581:         In other words: Assume that 

1582:         $q,q'\in P$, $h\in\omega$,

1583:         $\dom(q')=\dom(q)$, $q(\alpha,m)=q'(\alpha,m)$ for all

1584:         $m\geq h$ and $\alpha\in\dom(q)$,  and

1585:         $\val(q'_\alpha(m))\subseteq \val(q_\alpha(m))$ for all

1586:         $m<h$ and $\alpha\in\dom(q)$.  Then $q'\leq^* q$.}

1587:     \item If $q\leq p$ and $t\in\prodval(q,\mathord<n)$, then

1588:         $t$ restricted to the domain of $p$ is in

1589:         $\prodval(p,\mathord<n)$.\footnote{The same

1590:           holds for $q\leq^* p$, apart from the fact that $\dom(p)$

1591:           might not be a subset of $\dom(q)$. (Outside of $\dom(q)$,

1592:           $p$ could consists of ``maximal creatures with no information''.)}

1593:     \item If $q\leq p$, $t\in\prodval(q,\mathord<n)$, 

1594:         and $s$ is the corresponding element in $\prodval(p,\mathord<n)$,

1595:         then $q\wedge t\leq s\wedge p$.

1596:     \item If $q'\leq q$ and 

1597:       $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$,

1598:       then $q'$ essentially decides $\n\tau$.

1599:     \item If $q\wedge t$ essentially decides $\n\tau$ for each

1600:       $t\in\prodval(q,\mathord < n)$, then $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$.

1601:   \end{enumerate}

1602: \end{Facts}

1603: 

1604: 

1605: 

1606: 

1607: 

1608: Recall that $\varphi(\mathord< n)$ 

1609: is an upper bound for the number of possible sequences of trunks 

1610: of height $n$ (cf.~\ref{asm:I}). 

1611: \begin{Thm}\label{thm:prod}

1612:   If $\cK_\alpha(n)$ is $(n,r(n))$-decisive

1613:   and $r(n)$-halving for 

1614:   $r(n)=1/(n^2\varphi(\mathord<n))$ and

1615:   every $\alpha\in I$, $n\in\omega$,

1616:   then $P$ is proper and $\omega\ho$-bounding.

1617:   Assume $|I|\geq 2$ and set $\lambda=|I|^\al0$.

1618:   Then $P$ forces $|I|\leq 2^\al0\leq \lambda$.

1619: \end{Thm}

1620: 

1621: \begin{proof}

1622:   The proof closely follows the one-dimensional case.

1623:   We again prove pure decision and fusion, and the rest

1624:   follows as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:onedim}.

1625:   (Note that $|P|=|I|^\al0$, and that $\n\eta_\alpha$ and $\n\eta_\beta$

1626:   are forced to be different for $\alpha\neq\beta$.)

1627: 

1628:   So we have to define $\leq_M$: First we set

1629:   $r\leq^\text{new}_{M} p$, if $r\leq p$, and

1630:   \begin{itemize}

1631:     \item if $n\in\omega$ and $\alpha\in\supp(r,n)\setminus \dom(p)$,

1632:       then $n>M$, $\card{\supp(r,n)}/n\leq  1/(M+1)$, and

1633:       $\nor(r(\alpha,n))> M$.

1634:   \end{itemize}

1635: 

1636: 

1637:   Assume that $M\in\omega$ and $q\leq p$. By  extending finitely many trunks in

1638:   $q$ at positions $\alpha\notin\dom(p)$, we get an $r\leq q$ such that

1639:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:trex}

1640:     r\leq^\text{new}_{M} p\text{ and }

1641:     r(\alpha,n)=q(\alpha,n)\text{ for }\alpha\in\dom(p)

1642:   \end{equation}

1643:   (cf. Figure~\ref{fig:prod_pgtq}).

1644: 

1645:   $s\leq^\text{old}_{M} p$, if $s\leq p$ and

1646:   there is an $h\geq M$ such that

1647:   for all $\alpha\in\dom(p)$,

1648:   \begin{itemize}

1649:     \item $\trunklg(s,\alpha)=\trunklg(p,\alpha)$,

1650:     \item if $n<h$, then $s(\alpha,n)=p(\alpha,n)$,

1651:     \item if $\alpha\in\supp(p,n)$ and $n\geq h$,

1652:           then $\nor(s(\alpha,n))\geq M$.

1653:   \end{itemize}

1654: 

1655:   $r\leq_{M} p$, if $r\leq^\text{new}_{M} p$ and $r\leq^\text{old}_{M} p$.

1656: 

1657:   By~\eqref{eq:trex} we get:

1658:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:guto}

1659:     \text{If $q\leq^\text{old}_{M} p$, then there is an

1660:     $r\leq q$ such that $r\leq_{M} p$.}

1661:   \end{equation}

1662:   

1663:   {\bf $\leq_n$ satisfies fusion:}\\

1664:   Assume that $(p^m)_{m\in\omega}$ satisfies $p^{m+1}\leq_{m+1} p^{m}$.

1665:   Define $q$ by $\dom(   q    )=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\dom(p^n)$

1666:   and $q_\alpha(n)=p^M_\alpha(n)$,

1667:   where $M\geq n$ is minimal (or: arbitrary) such that $\alpha\in\dom(p^M)$.

1668:   Then $q\in P$:

1669:   Fix some $k$.

1670:   Since $p^k\in P$, there is an $l$ such that 

1671:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:xx7}

1672:     \nor(p^k(\alpha,n))>k\text{ and }\card{\supp(p^k,n)}/n<1/(k+1)

1673:     \text{ for all }n>l\text{ and }\alpha\in\supp(p^k,n).

1674:   \end{equation}

1675:   Since 

1676:   \mbox{$p^{k+1}\leq_{k+1} p^k$, \eqref{eq:xx7}} holds 

1677:   for $p^{k+1}$ as well, and for all $p^m$ with $m>k$, and

1678:   therefore for $q$.

1679: 

1680:   So we just have to show pure decision:

1681:   Fix $\n\tau$, a name of an ordinal.

1682: 

1683:   {\bf The basic construction $S(p,M)$:}

1684:   \\

1685:   Let $n$ be the minimal trunk-length of $p$, 

1686:   i.e.\ $n=\min(\{\trunklg(p,\alpha):\, \alpha\in \dom(p)\})$.

1687:   We will now define $S(p,M)\leq p$ for $M\in\omega$.

1688: 

1689:   Enumerate $\prodval(p,\mathord \leq n)$ as $s^0,\dots,s^{l-1}$.

1690:   So $l\leq \varphi(\mathord=n)$.

1691:   Set $p^{-1}\DEFEQ p$.

1692:   Given $p^{k-1}$, define $p^k\leq p^{k-1}\wedge s^k$ and

1693:   $h^{k}$ such that

1694:   for all $\alpha\in \dom(p)$\footnote{we do not require

1695:     anything for $\alpha\in \dom(p^k)\setminus\dom(p)$}

1696:   \begin{itemize}

1697:     \item

1698:       $\trunklg(p^k,\alpha)=\trunklg(p^{k-1}\wedge s^k,\alpha)

1699:       =\max(n+1,\trunklg(p,\alpha))$,

1700:     \item

1701:       if $n<m<h^k$,

1702:       then $\nor(p^k(\alpha,m))\geq\nor(p^{k-1}(\alpha,m))-r(m)$,

1703:     \item

1704:       if $m\geq h^k$, then $\nor(p^k(\alpha,m))\geq M$,

1705:   \end{itemize}

1706:   and such that additionally one of the following two cases holds:

1707:   \begin{description}

1708:     \item[dec] $p^k$ essentially decides $\n\tau$, or

1709:     \item[half] it is not possible to satisfy ``dec'' (for any choice

1710:      of $h^k$),

1711:      and $\dom(p^k)=\dom(p^{k-1})$ and

1712:      $p^k(\alpha,m)=\chalf(p^{k-1}(\alpha,m))$ for all $m>n$ and

1713:      $\alpha\in\supp(p^{k-1},m)$.

1714:   \end{description}

1715:   So we first try to find a $p^k$ satisfying ``dec'' (possibly

1716:   with larger domain); if we fail we just halve each

1717:   $p^{k-1}(\alpha,m)$.

1718: 

1719:   We construct $p^k$ for each $0\leq k<l$.

1720:   This gives a function

1721:   \[

1722:     F:\prod_{\alpha\in\supp(p,n)}\val(p(\alpha,n))\fnto

1723:      \{\text{dec},\text{half}\}.

1724:   \]

1725:   Each $\cK_\alpha(n)$ is $(n,r(n))$-decisive,

1726:   and $\card{\supp(p,n)}< n$. So

1727:   according to Corollary~\ref{cor:multidimbignesssimple} (for $k=n-1$)

1728:   there are

1729:   $\cd_\alpha\in\cS(p(\alpha,n))$ (for $\alpha\in\supp(p,n)$)

1730:   such that $F\restriction \prod_{\alpha\in\supp(p,n)}\val(\cd_\alpha)$

1731:   is constant and $\nor(\cd_\alpha)\geq \nor(p(\alpha,n))-n\cdot r(n)$.

1732: 

1733:   For this construction to work, we have to assume that the

1734:   norms of all the creatures involved are big enough (so that

1735:   we can apply bigness and halving). If

1736:   this is not the case, $S(p,M)$ is undefined. Otherwise,

1737: %  we define $S(p,M)$ as follows: $S(p,M)\restriction n=

1738: %  p\restriction n$,

1739: %  $S(p,M)(\alpha,n)=\cd_\alpha$ and $S(p,M)=p^{l-1}$ otherwise.

1740: %  More formally,

1741:   we set $\dom(S(p,M))=\dom(p^{l-1})$

1742:   and for $\alpha\in\dom(S(p,M))$

1743:   \[

1744:     S(p,M)(\alpha,m)=

1745:     \begin{cases}

1746:       p(\alpha,m) & \text{ if } m<n\text{ and }\alpha\in\dom(p),\\

1747:       \cd_\alpha & \text{ if } m=n\text{ and }\alpha\in\dom(p),\\

1748:       p^{l-1}(\alpha,m) & \text{ otherwise.}

1749:     \end{cases}

1750:   \]

1751:   We call $q=S(p,M)$ halving, if the constant value of

1752:   $F$ is ``half''.

1753: 

1754:   If $q$ is not halving, then $q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$:

1755:   If $t\in\prodval(q,\mathord\leq n)$, then $t$ restricted to

1756:   $\dom(p)$ is in

1757:   $\prodval(p,\mathord\leq n)$, i.e.\ it is some

1758:   $s^k$. 

1759:   Then $q\wedge t\leq q\wedge s^k$, and

1760:   $q\wedge s^k$

1761:   is stronger than $p^k$, which essentially decides $\n\tau$. 

1762:   Now use Facts~\ref{fact:variousfacts}(6,7).

1763: 

1764:   {\bf Some properties of $S(p,M)$:}

1765:   \\

1766:   If $q=S(p,M)$ is defined and $n$ the minimal trunk-length of

1767:   $p$, then:

1768:   \begin{gather}

1769:     \label{eq:qamd}

1770:     \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

1771:       \raggedright

1772:         $\nor(q(\alpha,n))\geq

1773:         \nor(p(\alpha,n)) - n\cdot r(n)

1774:         \text{ for } \alpha\in\supp(p,n).$

1775:       }

1776:     \\\label{eq:qbmd}

1777:     \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

1778:       \raggedright

1779:         $\nor(q(\alpha,m))

1780:         \geq\min(M,\nor(p(\alpha,m)))-\varphi(\mathord=n)\cdot r(m)

1781:         $ for all $m>n$ and $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$.

1782:       }

1783:     \\\label{eq:dreizweimd}

1784:       \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{

1785:       \raggedright

1786:         If $q$ is halving, then there is no $q'\leq q$

1787:         essentially deciding $\n\tau$ such that

1788:         \mbox{$\trunklg(q',\alpha)=\max(n+1,\trunklg(p,\alpha))$} for all

1789:         $\alpha\in\dom(p)$.

1790:       }

1791:   \end{gather}

1792:   To see~\eqref{eq:dreizweimd}, assume that $q'$ is a counterexample

1793:   and that $h$ is such that

1794:   $\nor(q'(\alpha,m))>M$ for all $m>h$ and $\alpha\in\supp(q',m)$.

1795:   Let $t$ be in $\prodval(q',\mathord\leq n)$. $t$ restricted 

1796:   to $\dom(p)$ is $s^k$ for some $k<l$.

1797:   We know that 

1798:   $p^k$ was constructed by halving each creature 

1799:   of $p^{k-1}\wedge s^k$

1800:   and that $q'\leq p^k$.

1801:   We now define $r$: Set $\dom(r)=\dom(q')$.  If

1802:   $m\leq h$ and

1803:   $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$, 

1804:   we un-halve $q'(\alpha,m)$ to some 

1805:   $\delta(\alpha,m)$ and set $r(\alpha,m)=\delta(\alpha,m)$.

1806:   Otherwise we set $r(\alpha,m)=q'(\alpha,m)$.

1807:   According to~\ref{fact:variousfacts}(3,6) $r$ essentially decides $\n\tau$.

1808:   So we should have chosen $r$ instead of $p^k$, a contradiction.

1809: 

1810: 

1811:   {\bf $S(p,M)$ essentially decides:}

1812:   \\

1813:   Assume that $M>3$, and

1814:   that $\nor(p(\alpha,m))>3$ for all $m\in\omega$ and

1815:   $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$. We now show that  $S(p,M)$ exists

1816:   and is not halving.

1817: 

1818:   Assume towards a contradiction that $S(p,M)$ is halving.

1819:   Let $n$ be again the minimal trunk-length of $p$.

1820:   We set $q^{n-1}=p$.

1821:   Assume that for $k\geq n-1$, $q^k$ is

1822:   already defined. We set

1823:   $M_k=M+k+1-n$. (So $M_{n-1}=M$.)

1824:   We define $q^{k+1}$ the following way:

1825:   List  $\prodval(q^k,\mathord\leq k)$ as $s^0,\dots,s^{l-1}$.

1826:   So $l\leq \varphi(\leq k)$. Set $r^{-1}\DEFEQ q^k$. Given

1827:   $r^{i-1}$, set $r^i=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,M_k)$ (if defined).

1828:   Define $q^{k+1}$ to be $q^k$ up to $k$ and $r^{l-1}$ otherwise,

1829:   and 

1830:   additionally increase the stems outside $\dom(q^k)$

1831:   to satisfy $q^{k+1}\leq^\text{new}_{M_k} q^k$.

1832:   More formally: We pick some $h>M_k$, $h>k$  such that

1833:   that $\nor(r^{l-1}(\alpha,m))>M_k$

1834:   and $|\supp(r^{l-1},m)|/m<1/M_k$

1835:   for all $m>h$ and $\alpha\in\supp(r^{l-1},m)$.

1836:   For $\alpha\in \dom(r^{l-1})\setminus \dom(q^k)$

1837:   and $m\leq h$, we pick some $t(\alpha,m)\in\val(r^{l-1}(\alpha,m))$.

1838:   The we define $q^{k+1}$ by $\supp(q^{k+1})=\supp(r^{l-1})$ and

1839:   \[

1840:     q^{k+1}(\alpha,m)=

1841:     \begin{cases}

1842:       q^{k}(\alpha,m)& \text{ if }m\leq k\text{ and }\alpha\in\dom(q^k),\\

1843:       r^{l-1}(\alpha,m)&  \text{ if }m>h\text{ or if }m>k\text{ and }\alpha\in\dom(q^k),\\

1844:       t(\alpha,m)&  \text{ if }m\leq h\text{ and }\alpha\notin\dom(q^k).\\

1845:     \end{cases}

1846:   \]

1847:   Note that $q^n$ is just $S(p,M)$ with some increased trunks 

1848:   outside of $\dom(p)$.

1849: 

1850:   $q^{k+1}$ satisfies for $\alpha\in\dom(q^{k})$, $\beta\in\dom(q^{k+1})$:

1851:   \begin{itemize}

1852:     \item $q^{k+1}(\alpha,m)=q^k(\alpha,m)$ for $m\leq k$.

1853:     \item $\nor(q^{k+1}(\alpha,k+1))\geq \nor(q^k(\alpha,k+1))-

1854:           \varphi(\mathord\leq k)\cdot (k+1)\cdot r(k+1)$.

1855:     \item $\nor(q^{k+1}(\alpha,m  ))\geq \min(M^k,\nor(q^k(\alpha,m  )))-

1856:           \varphi(\mathord\leq k+1)\cdot r(m)$ for $m>k+1$.

1857:     \item $\nor(q^{k+1}(\beta,m  ))\geq M^k$ if $\beta\in\supp(q^{k+1},m)\setminus \dom(q^k)$.

1858:   \end{itemize}

1859:   Iterating this $l$ many times, we get:

1860:   \begin{align}

1861:     \label{eq:qfmd}

1862:     \nor(q^{k+l}(\alpha,m  ))\geq & \min(M^k,\nor(q^k(\alpha,m  )))-

1863:               \min(l,m-k)\cdot \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot m \cdot r(m),

1864:     \\\intertext{so according to the definition of $r(m)$ we get}

1865:     \label{eq:qgmd}

1866:     \nor(q^{k+l}(\alpha,m  ))\geq & \min(M^k,\nor(q^k(\alpha,m  )))-1.

1867:   \end{align}

1868:   This shows, as in the one-dimensional case,

1869:   that each $q^m$ is defined, and that $q^\omega$ is a condition in $P$,

1870:   where we define

1871:   $q^\omega$ by $\dom(q^\omega)=\bigcup_{k\in\omega} q^k$,

1872:   and $q^\omega(\alpha,m)=q^k(\alpha,m)$, where $k$ is the minimal (or: some)

1873:   $k\geq m$ such that $\alpha\in\dom(q^k)$. Just as for~\eqref{eq:prop7},

1874:   we can generalize~\eqref{eq:dreizweimd} by induction and get:

1875:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:prop7md}

1876:     \parbox{0.8\columnwidth}{%

1877:       \raggedright

1878:         There is no $q'\leq q^{k}$ essentially deciding $\n\tau$ such that

1879:         \mbox{$\trunklg(q',\alpha)=\max(k+1,\trunklg(q^{k},\alpha))$} for all

1880:         $\alpha\in\dom(q^{k})$.

1881:      }

1882:   \end{equation}

1883:   But there

1884:   is a $q'\leq q^\omega$ deciding $\n\tau$. This implies that the

1885:   trunk-lengths of $q'$ and of $q^\omega$ are the same on almost

1886:   all elements of the domain of $q^\omega$. So by increasing 

1887:   finitely many trunks of $q'$, we can assume that 

1888:   $\trunklg(q',\alpha)=\max(k+1,\trunklg(q^\omega,\alpha))$

1889:   for some $k$. So $q'\leq q^{k}$ decides 

1890:   $\n\tau$, a contradiction to~\eqref{eq:prop7md}.\footnote{So

1891:     this step in the proof is the reason that we had to redefine

1892:     $\leq$.}

1893: 

1894:   {\bf Pure decision:}

1895:   \\

1896:   Given $p$ and $M$, we find an $h>M+6$ such that

1897:   $\nor(p(\alpha,m))>M+6$ for all $m\geq h$ and $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$.

1898:   Enumerate $\prodval(p,\mathord \leq h-1)$ as

1899:   $\{s^1,\dots, s^l\}$. As above,

1900:   set $p^0=p$, $p^{k+1}=S(p^k\wedge s^k,M+6)$, and define

1901:   $q$ by $q(\alpha,m)=p(\alpha,m)$ for $m<h$ and $\alpha\in\dom(p)$,

1902:   and by $q(\alpha,m)=p^{l-1}(\alpha,m)$ otherwise.

1903:   Then $q\leq^{\text{old}}_M p$ essentially decides $\n \tau$,

1904:   and according to~\eqref{eq:guto} we

1905:   find a $q'\leq q$ such that $q\leq_M p$.

1906: \end{proof}

1907: 

1908: As already mentioned, only the growth rate of $r(n)$ is relevant.

1909: Since we are dealing with decisive creatures, we can 

1910: increase bigness even exponentially (in $n$) while decreasing the norms 

1911: by a constant factor (cf.\ Corollary~\ref{cor:multidimbignesssimple}).

1912: We use this for the following version of rapid reading.

1913: Again, we set $\EXP(B,n,0)=B$ and $\EXP(B,n,k+1)=2^{\EXP(B,n,k)^n}$;

1914: and we define $r$, $\varphi$ as in the previous theorem.

1915: 

1916: \begin{Thm}\label{thm:rapid} Assume that

1917:   \begin{itemize} 

1918:     \item $\delta\in\omega$,

1919:     \item $g:\omega\fnto\omega$ is monotonously increasing,

1920:     \item $\cK_\alpha(n)$ is  $(g(n),r(n))$-big,

1921:       $(n,r(n))$-decisive and $r(n)$-halving

1922:       for all $\alpha\in I$, $n\in\omega$,

1923:     \item 

1924:       $\n \nu(n)$ is a $P$-name and $p\in P$ forces that

1925:       $\n \nu(n)<\EXP(g(n),n,n\cdot \delta)$ for all $n$.

1926:     \end{itemize}

1927:   Then there is a $q\leq p$ which 

1928:   $\mathord<n$-decides $\n \nu(n)$ for all $n$ .

1929: \end{Thm}

1930: 

1931: 

1932: \begin{proof}

1933:   We make the same modification to the previous proof as 

1934:   in the one-dimensional case:

1935: 

1936:   {\em The basic construction $S(p,l,M)$:}

1937:   We again assume that $n$ is the minimal length 

1938:   of the trunks in $p$, and use the notation

1939:   $S(p,l,M)$ (for $l\leq n$)

1940:   for the same construction as $S(p,M)$, where 

1941:   we set $\n\tau=\n\nu(l)$, and

1942:   instead of trying to {\em essentially} decide $\n\tau$,

1943:   we try to {\em decide} it.

1944: 

1945:   So 

1946:   instead of the two cases ``dec'' and ``half'', we get 

1947:   $\EXP(g(n),n,n\cdot \delta)+1$ many cases: one for each potential value

1948:   of $\n\nu(n)$, and

1949:   (if none of these cases can be satisfied) ``half''.

1950:   So the number of possible cases is less than $\EXP(g(n),n,n\cdot (\delta+1))$.

1951:   We use Corollary~\ref{cor:biggerbigness} to find

1952:   successors $q(\alpha,m)$ of $p(\alpha,m)$

1953:   with $F$-homogeneous product.

1954:   This decreases the norm by at most $r(n)\cdot (n(\delta+1)+n)$,

1955:   i.e.\ by $n\cdot (\delta+2)\cdot r(n)$.

1956: 

1957:   {\em Some properties of  $S(p,l,M)$:}

1958:   So instead of~\eqref{eq:qamd} we get

1959:   \[

1960:         \nor(q(\alpha,n))\geq

1961:         \nor(p(\alpha,n)) - n(\delta+2)\cdot r(n)

1962:         \text{ for } \alpha\in\supp(p,n).

1963:   \]

1964:   There is no change to~\eqref{eq:qbmd}, and in~\eqref{eq:dreizweimd}

1965:   we replace ``essentially deciding $\n\tau$'' with

1966:   ``deciding $\n\nu(l)$''.

1967: 

1968:   {\em $S(p,l,M)$ decides:} We again construct $q^k$, each time trying to

1969:   decide $\n\tau=g(l)$ (independently of $k$). 

1970: %  So~\eqref{eq:rxmd} no reads:

1971: %  \begin{equation*}

1972: %    r^i=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,l,M_k).

1973: %  \end{equation*}

1974: %  (So we only need $(g(l)+1,r(k))$-bigness). 

1975:   Instead of~\eqref{eq:qfmd}, we now get:

1976:   \[

1977:     \nor(q^{k+l}(\alpha,m  ))\geq \min(M^k,\nor(q^k(\alpha,m  )))-

1978:     \min(l,m-k)\cdot \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot m(\delta+2) \cdot r(m),

1979:   \]

1980:   and $r(m)=1/(m^2\varphi(\mathord<m))$.

1981:   So 

1982:   \[

1983:     \min(l,m-k)\cdot \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot m\cdot(\delta+2) \cdot r(m)

1984:     \leq  m^2 \cdot \varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot r(m)\cdot (\delta+2)\leq \delta+2.

1985:   \]

1986:   So if we assume that

1987:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:tmpgurke}

1988:     \nor(p(\alpha,m))>\delta+2\text{ for all }m\in\omega\text{ and }

1989:     \alpha\in\supp(p,m), 

1990:  \end{equation}

1991:   then again each $q^k$ (and $q^\omega$) is

1992:   defined, and we get~\eqref{eq:prop7md} 

1993:   for ``deciding $\n\nu(l)$''

1994:   instead of ``essentially deciding $\n\tau$''.

1995:   But there is some $q'\leq q^\omega$ deciding $\n\nu(l)$,

1996:   a contradiction.

1997: 

1998:   So far we know the following:

1999:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:gulag}

2000:     \parbox{0,8\columnwidth}{

2001:       \raggedright If $n$ is minimal trunk-length of $p$,

2002:       if $p$ satisfies~\eqref{eq:tmpgurke}, and if $M>2(\delta+2)$, 

2003:       then $S(p,n,M)$ exists and decides $\nu(n)$.}

2004:   \end{equation}

2005:   {\em Rapid reading:}

2006:   Instead of the part on {\em pure decision}, we again proceed as follows:

2007:   Fix $p\in P$ and $M>\delta+2$.  We can assume that 

2008:   $p$ satisfies~\eqref{eq:tmpgurke},

2009:   even for $2(\delta+2)$ instead of $\delta+2$ (just increase finitely many of

2010:   the trunks).

2011:   We set $k_0$ to be the minimal trunk-length of $p$, and

2012:   $q^{k_0}=p$.

2013:   We now construct $q^{k+1}$ and $q^\omega$ just as above, but this 

2014:   time using 

2015:   \begin{equation*}

2016:     r^{i}=S(r^{i-1}\wedge s^i,k+1,M_k).

2017:   \end{equation*} 

2018:   I.e.\ we try to decide $\n\nu(k+1)$.

2019:   Each $r^{i}(\alpha,n)$ has sufficient norm, and so 

2020:   according to~\eqref{eq:gulag} $r^{i}$ (which has trunk-length $k+1$)

2021:   decides $\n\nu(k+1)$. This implies that $q^{k+1}$ (and therefore

2022:   $q^\omega$ as well) $\mathord\leq k$-decides $\n\nu(k+1)$.

2023: \end{proof}

2024: 

2025: 

2026: 

2027: The rest of this section can safely be ignored: We describe how we

2028: end up with our particular definition of the product. We want to find a

2029: construction, similar to the countable support product, so that we can

2030: generalize the pure decision proof of Section~\ref{sec:puredecondim}:

2031: \begin{figure}[tb]

2032:   \begin{center}

2033:     \scalebox{0.25}{\input{motivation.pstex_t}}

2034:     \caption{\label{fig:motivation}

2035:       (a) A condition $p$ in $P$: $\dom(p)\subseteq I$ is 

2036:       countable, at height $n$ there are less than $n$ many creatures.

2037:       (b) The construction analog to $S(p,M)$.

2038:       (c) We have to redefine $\leq$.

2039:       }

2040:   \end{center}

2041: \end{figure}

2042: 

2043: 

2044: \begin{itemize}

2045:   \item To get $\al2$-cc, the support of the product can be at most

2046:     countable.  For fusion, we have to allow at least countable support.

2047:   \item A condition $p$ is a sequence

2048:     $(p(\alpha,n))_{n\in\omega,\alpha\in\dom(p)}$. At each index $\alpha$,

2049:     $p$ has a trunk, and above that $p(\alpha,n)$ is a creature 

2050:     in $\cK_\alpha(n)$.

2051:   \item To construct $S(p,M)$, we will set $n$ to be the minimal

2052:     height of any stem of $p$. For each combination for

2053:     values at height $n$ we get ``dec'' or ``half''.

2054:     We want to use decisiveness to get homogeneous successors.

2055:     For this we need that at height $n$,

2056:     there are e.g.\ less than $n$ many

2057:     creatures, and that $\cK(n)$

2058:     is sufficiently decisive and big with

2059:     respect to $n$. So we will generally assume that at

2060:     each height $h$, there are less than $h$ many creatures,

2061:     the rest is trunks, cf.\ Figure~\ref{fig:motivation}(a).

2062:   \item 

2063:     In the same construction step

2064:     we also have to assume that 

2065:     each of the creatures at height $n$ has sufficient norm.

2066:     So we will not just require that for each $\alpha\in I$

2067:     the norms of $p(\alpha,h)$ go to infinity, but that 

2068:     the minimum of all the norms at height $h$ go to infinity.

2069:   \item When we set $q=S(p,M)$ and are in the case ``half'', instead

2070:     of~\eqref{eq:dreizwei}: 

2071:     ``no $q'\leq q$ with trunk-length $n+1$

2072:     essentially decides $\n\tau$'', we naturally get 

2073:     ``no $q'\leq q$ essentially decides $\n\tau$, if

2074:     the trunk-length at $\alpha$

2075:     is the maximum of $n+1$ and the trunk-length of $p$ at $\alpha$.''

2076:   \item We now assume towards a contradiction that $q=S(p,M)$ 

2077:     is halving.

2078:     We iterate the construction for all heights, get

2079:     $q^\omega$, and find some  $q'\leq q^\omega$ essentially

2080:     deciding $\n\tau$. However, this is not a contradiction:

2081:     $q'$ could just have a longer trunk at each $\alpha$,

2082:     cf.\ Figure~\ref{fig:motivation}(c).

2083:   \item To fix this problem we redefine 

2084:     $q\leq p$: We require that the trunk-lengths of $q$

2085:     are (on the common domain) almost always equal to

2086:     those of $p$, cf.\ Figure~\ref{fig:prod_pgtq}.

2087:   \item Once we redefine $q\leq p$ this way, and additionally

2088:     require that at level $h$ there are less than $h$ many

2089:     creatures, we could end up with a

2090:     condition whose domain cannot be enlarged any more 

2091:     (since there already are maximally, i.e.\ $h-1$, many 

2092:     creatures at each level $h$). We fix this by adding e.g.\ the requirement

2093:     that the number of creatures at level

2094:     $h$ divided by $h$ converges to $0$.

2095: \end{itemize}

2096: 

2097: 

2098: \section{A decisive creature with bigness and halving}\label{sec:example}

2099: 

2100: In this section, we construct decisive creatures with halving.

2101: 

2102: We use $\bfF (n)\DEFEQ n$ for all $n$, i.e.\ the $n$-creatures live on the

2103: singleton $\{n\}$.

2104: 

2105: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:decexists}

2106:   Assume that $n$ and $B$ are natural numbers, and that $0<r<1$.

2107:   Then there is a natural number $\Psi(n,B,r)$ so that we can

2108:   set $\bfH(n)=\Psi(n,B,r)$ and find 

2109:   $r$-halving, $(B,r)$-big and $(n,r)$-decisive

2110:   $n$-creatures 

2111:   $(\cK(n),\cS)$ such that

2112:   $\nor(\cc)>n$ for some $\cc\in\cK(n)$.

2113: \end{Lem}

2114: 

2115: \begin{uRems}

2116:   \begin{itemize}

2117:     \item

2118:       Without the last requirement the lemma is trivial, just assume that

2119:       $\nor(\cc)<1$ for all $\cc\in\cK(n)$, and read the definitions of

2120:       halving, big and decisive. 

2121:     \item If such $(\cK(n),\cS)$ exists for some $\bfH(n)$, then it exists for

2122:       every larger $\bfH(n)$ as well.

2123:   \end{itemize}

2124: \end{uRems}

2125: 

2126: The rest of this section consists of the proof of the lemma.

2127: This proof is not needed in the rest of the paper.

2128: 

2129: 

2130: 

2131: 

2132: We set $\flarge(m)=2^{2^{m^2}}$ and $a\DEFEQ 2^{\frac{1}{r}}$.  So

2133: $\log_a(2)=r$.

2134: 

2135: 

2136: \subsection*{The pre-norms} 

2137: \begin{Lem}

2138:   There is a $J\in\omega$ and a function $\ns$ on

2139:   the powerset of $J$ such that the following holds:

2140:   \begin{enumerate}

2141:     \item $\ns$ is monotonous, i.e.\ %

2142:       $u_1\subseteq u_2$ implies $\ns(u_1)\leq \ns(u_2)$.

2143:     \item $\ns(\emptyset)=0$, and $\ns(J)\geq a^{n+1}$.

2144:     \item If $\ns(u)=k+1$ then there is an $M\in\omega$ and a sequence

2145:       $0=j_0<j_1<\dots<j_M$ such that $M\geq \max(B,\flarge(j_1+n))$ and

2146:       $\ns(u\cap [j_i,j_{i+1}-1])\geq k$ for all $i\in M$.

2147:   \end{enumerate}

2148: \end{Lem}

2149: %\end{uLem}

2150: \begin{proof}

2151:   For finite subsets $u$ of $\omega$ define $\ns(u)\geq k$ by induction

2152:   on $k$: For all $u$ set

2153:   $\ns(u)\geq 0$, and $\ns(u)\geq 1$ iff $u$ is nonempty.

2154:   For $k\geq 1$, we set $\ns(u)\geq k+1$ iff (3) as above holds. We show by

2155:   induction on $k$ that for every $a\in\omega$ there is a $b\in\omega$ such that

2156:   $\ns([a,b-1])=k$: Assume this is true for $k$. Given $a=j_0$,

2157:   let $j_1$ be minimal such that $\ns([j_0,j_1-1])=k$.

2158:   For every $i<\max(B,\flarge(j_1+n))$, find the minimal

2159:   $j_{i+1}$ such that $\ns([j_i,j_{i+1}-1])=k$.

2160:   Then $\ns([j_0,j_M-1])=k+1$.

2161:   So we can pick $J$ such that $\ns([0,J-1])=a^{n+1}$.

2162: \end{proof}

2163: We set $\Psi(n,B,r)=\bfH(n)=2^J$. 

2164: For a subset $c$ of $\bfH(n)$, we set

2165: \[

2166:   \prenor(c)\DEFEQ\max\{\ns(u):\, u\subseteq J, c\restriction u=2^u\},

2167: \]

2168: where $c\restriction u$ is $\{b\restriction u:\, b\in c\}$.

2169: So $d\subseteq c$ implies $\prenor(d)\leq \prenor(c)$.

2170: 

2171: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:gurke2}

2172:   Assume that $M\in\omega$, $J$ a set,

2173:   $u\subseteq J$, $c\subseteq 2^{J}$, $c\restriction

2174:   u=2^u$, $c=\bigcup_{i\in M}c_i$, and that $u_i$ ($i\in M$) are pairwise

2175:   disjoint subsets of $u$.

2176:   Then $2^{u_i}=c_i\restriction u_i$  for some $i\in M$.

2177: \end{Lem}

2178: 

2179: \begin{proof}

2180:   Otherwise, for all $i\in M$ there is an $a_i\in 2^{u_i}\setminus

2181:   (c_i\restriction u_i)$.  Let $b\in 2^u$ contain the concatenation of these

2182:   $a_i$. Then $b\in c\restriction u$, so $b\in c_i\restriction u$ for some $i\in

2183:   M$, and $a_i\in c_i\restriction u_i$, a contradiction.

2184: \end{proof}

2185: 

2186: \subsection*{The creatures}

2187: An $n$-creature $\cc$ is a pair $(c,k)$ such that

2188: $c\subseteq \bfH(n)$, $k\in\omega$ and $k\leq \prenor(c)-1$.

2189: $\nor(\cc)$ is determined from $(c,k)$ by

2190: \[

2191:   \nor(c,k)\DEFEQ \log_{a}(\prenor(c)-k).

2192: \]

2193: For $n$-creatures $\cc\cong(c,k)$ and $\cd\cong(d,k')$ we define

2194: \[

2195:   (d,k') \in \cS(c,k)\text{ if }d\subseteq c\text{ and }k'\geq k.

2196: \]

2197: 

2198: We now show that these creatures satisfy our requirements:

2199: \begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:decexists}]

2200:   It is clear that norms can be bigger than $n$:

2201:   \[ 

2202:     \nor(\bfH(n),0)=\log_a(\prenor(\bfH(n)))=\log_a(\ns(J))\geq \log_a(a^{n+1})=n+1.

2203:   \]

2204:   \subsubsection*{Halving}

2205:   Assume $\nor(\cc)>1$, i.e.\ $\prenor(c)-k>a>2$.

2206:   We define

2207:   \[

2208:     \chalf(c,k)\DEFEQ (c,k+\lfloor{(\prenor(c)-k)/2}\rfloor).

2209:   \]

2210:   Note that $\log_{a}(\lceil{(\prenor(c)-k)/2}\rceil)\geq

2211:   \nor(c,k)-\log_{a}(2)= \nor(c,k)-r$.

2212:   So

2213:   \[

2214:     \nor(\chalf(c,k))=

2215:     \log_a(\prenor(c)-k-\lfloor{(\prenor(c)-k)/2}\rfloor)\geq

2216:     \nor(c,k)-r.

2217:   \]

2218:   If $(d,k')\in \cS(\chalf(c,k))$ and $\nor(d,k')>0$, then

2219:   \[

2220:     \prenor(d)\geq

2221:     k'+1\geq

2222:     k+\lfloor{(\prenor(c)-k)/2}\rfloor+1,

2223:   \]

2224:   and we can un-halve $(d,k')$ to $(d,k)\in\cS(c,k)$:

2225:   \[

2226:     \nor(d,k)=

2227:     \log_a(\prenor(d)-k)\geq

2228:     \log_a(\lfloor{(\prenor(c)-k)/2}\rfloor+1)\geq

2229:     \nor(c,k)-r,

2230:   \]

2231:   and $\val(d,k)=\val(d,k')=d$.

2232: 

2233: 

2234:   \subsubsection*{Bigness}

2235:   Let $(c,l)$ be an $n$-creature and $\nor(c,l)=x+r\geq r$.

2236:   Let $u\subseteq J$ witness $\prenor(c)=a^{x+r}+l=2a^x+l$.

2237:   So there is  an increasing sequence $(j_i)_{i\in M+1}$

2238:   such that $c\restriction u=2^u$ and

2239:   \begin{gather*}

2240:     M\geq \max(B,\flarge(j_1+n)) \text{, and }

2241:     \\

2242:     \ns(u\cap [j_i,j_{i+1}-1])\geq 2a^x+l-1\geq a^x+l

2243:     \text{ for all }i\in M. 

2244:   \end{gather*}

2245:   (If $x>0$, the last inequality is strict.)

2246: 

2247:   Take any $F:c\fnto M$. Then $c=\bigcup_{i\in M}F^{-1}\{i\}$.

2248:   We set $u_i\DEFEQ u\cap[j_i,j_{i+1}-1]$ for $i\in M$. 

2249:   According to Lemma~\ref{lem:gurke2} there is

2250:   an $i\in M$ such that $F^{-1}\{i\}\restriction u_i=2^{u_i}$.

2251:   We set $d\DEFEQ F^{-1}\{i\}\subseteq c$.

2252:   Since $\ns(u_i)\geq a^x+l$ and $d\restriction u_i=2^{u_i}$,

2253:   $\nor(d,l)\geq \log_a(a^x)= x=\nor(c,l)-r$.

2254:   This shows that $(c,l)$ is $(M,r)$-big, and in particular $(B,r)$-big.

2255: 

2256:   \subsubsection*{Decisiveness}

2257:   Pick $(c,l)\in \cK(n)$ such that  $\nor(c,l)=x+r\geq r$.

2258:   As above there is a witness $u\subseteq J$, $M$

2259:   and $(j_i)_{i\in M+1}$.

2260:   Set $u^-\DEFEQ u\cap [j_0,j_{1}-1]$.

2261:   Let $d^-\subseteq c$ contain

2262:   for every $a\in 2^{u^-}$ exactly one $b\in c$

2263:   such that $b\restriction u^-=a$. Then

2264:   $\card{d}\leq 2^{j_1}\EQDEF K$ and (as above)

2265:   $\nor(d^-,l)\geq \nor(c,l)-r$. So $(d^-,l)$ is a $K$-small

2266:   successor of $(c,l)$.

2267: 

2268:   It remains to be shown that there is a $K$-big successor $(d^+,l)$.

2269: 

2270:   Let $F:c\fnto 2^{j_1}<M$ map $b$ to $b\restriction j_1$.

2271:   So as above there is an $i<M$ such that

2272:   $F^{-1}\{i\}\restriction u_i=2^{u_i}$ for $u_i\DEFEQ u\cap[j_i,j_{i+1}-1]$.

2273:   Obviously $i\neq 0$.

2274:   %(Otherwise

2275:   %$u'=u^-$. Pick $a_1\neq a_2\in 2^{u^-}$, and

2276:   %$b_1,b_2\in F^{-1}\{i\}$ such that $a_j=b_j\restriction u^-$

2277:   %for $j\in\{1,2\}$.

2278:   %Then $F(b_j)=a_j=i$, a contradiction.)

2279:   Set $d^+\DEFEQ F^{-1}\{i\}$.

2280:   Pick any $(d',l')\in \cS(d^+,l)$ with norm bigger than 1.

2281:   Let $\prenor(d')$ be witnessed by $u',M',(j'_i)_{i\leq M'}$.

2282:   Then $u'\cap j_1=\emptyset$

2283:   (since every $b\in d'$ has the same $b\restriction j_1$).

2284:   So $j'_1>j_1$, and

2285:   (by the same argument as above) $(d',l')$ is

2286:   $(\flarge(j_1+n),r)$-big. This finishes the proof,

2287:   since

2288:   \[

2289:     \flarge(j_1+n)=2^{2^{(j_1+n)^2}}\geq

2290:     2^{2^{j_1\cdot n}}=2^{{(2^{j_1})}^n}=2^{K^n}.\qedhere

2291:   \]

2292: \end{proof}

2293: 

2294: \section{countably many cardinal invariants}\label{sec:countable}

2295: 

2296: 

2297: Recall that $\myc_{f,g}$ and $\mycfa_{f,g}$ were defined in the introduction.

2298: 

2299: 

2300: \newcommand{\fmax}{f_\text{max}}

2301: 

2302: In the previous section, we defined $\Psi(n,M,r)$

2303: for $r>0$ and $n,M\in\omega$.

2304: We can now specify the requirements we need for 

2305: Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}:

2306: \begin{Asm}\label{asm:sufficientlydifferent}

2307:   $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)_{\epsilon\in\omega}$ 

2308:   is a sequence of functions from $\omega$ to $\omega$.

2309:   $\fmax$ is such that $f_\epsilon(m)\leq \fmax(m)$ for 

2310:   all $\epsilon\in\omega$.

2311:   We set

2312:   \[

2313:     \varphi(\mathord=m)\DEFEQ\fmax(m)^m,

2314:     \quad

2315:     \varphi(\mathord<n)\DEFEQ\prod_{m<n}\varphi(\mathord=m)

2316:     \quad

2317:     r(n)\DEFEQ \frac{1}{n^2\varphi(\mathord<n)},

2318:   \]

2319:   and assume:

2320:   \begin{itemize}

2321:     \item If $\epsilon\neq \epsilon'$, then there is an

2322:       $n$ such that $f_\epsilon(m)\neq f_{\epsilon'}(m)$

2323:       for all $m>n$.

2324:     \item $f_{\epsilon}(m)\gg g_{\epsilon}(m)$ for all $\epsilon,m$; 

2325:       more precisely $f_{\epsilon}(m)\geq \Psi(m,g_\epsilon(m),r(m))$.

2326:     \item If $f_\epsilon(m) > f_{\epsilon'}(m)$,

2327:       then $g_{\epsilon}(m)\gg f_{\epsilon'}(m)$; more precisely

2328:       $\varphi(\mathord<m)f_{\epsilon'}(m)^m<g_\epsilon(m)$. 

2329:     \item $g_\epsilon(m)>\varphi(\mathord<m)$.

2330:     \item $g_{\epsilon}(m+1)\geq \fmax(m)$

2331:       for all $\epsilon,m\in\omega$.

2332:   \end{itemize}

2333: \end{Asm}

2334: 

2335: The assumption states more or less that the 

2336: $f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon$ have sufficiently different 

2337: growth rates, and that each level is much bigger than

2338: the previous levels.

2339: If is clear that we can construct such sequences (by induction). 

2340: 

2341: 

2342: \begin{Thm}\label{thm:main}

2343:   Assume CH.

2344:   Choose for all $\epsilon\in\omega$ a cardinal $\kappa_\epsilon$ such that

2345:   $\kappa_\epsilon=\kappa_\epsilon^\al0$.

2346:   Let $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)_{\epsilon\in \omega}$ be as above.

2347:   Then there is a proper, $\al2$-cc, $\omega^\omega$-bounding

2348:   partial order $P$ which preserves cardinals and forces

2349:   that $\myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}=

2350:   \kappa_\epsilon$ for all $\epsilon\in \omega$.

2351: \end{Thm}

2352: 

2353: 

2354: Let $I$ be the disjoint union of $I_\epsilon$ ($\epsilon\in\omega$) such that

2355: each $I_\epsilon$ has size $\kappa_\epsilon$ and is disjoint to $\omega$.

2356: 

2357: We will use $\epsilon, \epsilon', \epsilon_1, \dots$ for the cardinal

2358: invariants (i.e.\ for elements of $\omega$), and $\alpha, \beta, \dots$ for

2359: elements of $I$. $I$ will be the  index set of the product.

2360: 

2361: 

2362: So according to the definition of $\Psi$,

2363: we can choose for each $\epsilon,n\in\omega$ a

2364: creating pair $(\cK_\epsilon(n), \cS_\epsilon)$

2365: satisfying the following:

2366: \begin{itemize}

2367:   \item $\bfF_\epsilon (n)=n$,

2368:   \item $\bfH_\epsilon(n)=f_\epsilon(n)$,

2369:   \item $\cK_\epsilon(n)$ is

2370:     $(g_\epsilon(n),r(n))$-big, $r(n)$-halving and

2371:     $(n,r(n))$-decisive.

2372: \end{itemize}

2373: 

2374: For every $\alpha\in I_\epsilon$ and $n\in\omega$, we set $\cK_\alpha(n)\DEFEQ

2375: \cK_{\epsilon}(n)$, $f_\alpha \DEFEQ f_{\epsilon}$ and $g_\alpha \DEFEQ

2376: g_{\epsilon}$ and we set

2377: $\trunklg^\text{min}(\alpha)$ to be the minimal $n$ such that

2378: $f_{\epsilon'}(m)\neq f_\epsilon(m)$ for all $\epsilon'<\epsilon$.

2379: 

2380: $P$ is the forcing notion defined in Section~\ref{sec:product}, where we

2381: additionally require 

2382: \begin{itemize}

2383:   \item $\trunklg(p,\alpha)\geq \trunklg^\text{min}(\alpha)$

2384:     for all conditions $p$ and $\alpha\in\dom(p)$.

2385: \end{itemize}

2386: As already noted, this does

2387: not change any of the results of Section~\ref{sec:product}.

2388: 

2389: Note that 

2390: $\varphi(\mathord <n)$ and $r(n)$ are as in Theorem~\ref{thm:prod}, and

2391: that we assume CH.

2392: So we get:

2393: \begin{Cor}\label{cor:variousbigness}

2394:   \begin{enumerate}

2395:     \item $P$ is proper and $\al2$-cc,

2396:       $P$ has continuous reading of names, and preserves all cardinals.

2397:     \item {\em (Separated support.)} 

2398:        If $p\in P$, $\alpha,\beta\in\supp(p,n)$, $\alpha\in I_\epsilon$,

2399:        $\beta\in I_{\epsilon'}$, and $\epsilon\neq\epsilon'$, then

2400:        $f_\epsilon(n)\neq f_{\epsilon'}(n)$.

2401:     \item {\em (Rapid reading.)} If $p\in P$ forces that $\n\eta$ is an

2402:        $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$-slalom,

2403:        or that $\n\eta(n)<f_\epsilon(n)$ for all $n$,

2404:        then there is a $q\leq p$ which $\mathord\leq n$-decides

2405:        $\n\eta(n)$ for all $n\in\omega$.

2406:   \end{enumerate}

2407: \end{Cor}

2408: 

2409: It also follows that $P_\epsilon\DEFEQ P_{I_\epsilon}$ is a complete

2410: subforcing of $P$ and forces that the size of the continuum is 

2411: $\kappa_\epsilon$.

2412: 

2413: \begin{proof}

2414:   (1): Theorem~\ref{thm:prod} and Lemma~\ref{lem:cc}.

2415:   (2): Assume that $\epsilon<\epsilon'$.

2416:     $\trunklg(p,\beta)>\trunklg^\text{min}(\beta)$, i.e.\ $f_\epsilon(n)\neq

2417:     f_{\epsilon'}(n)$. 

2418:   (3) follows from~\ref{thm:rapid}: Set 

2419:     $\delta=3$, $g(n)=\fmax(n-1)$ and

2420:     $\n\nu(n)=\n\eta(n-1)$ for all $n$.

2421:     Each $\cK_\epsilon(n)$ is  $(g_\epsilon(n),r(n))$-big

2422:     for some $\epsilon$, $g_\epsilon(n)\geq \fmax(n-1)=g(n)$,

2423:     and $p$ forces that there are at most

2424:     $\fmax(n-1)^{\fmax(n-1)}<\EXP(g(n),n,3)$ many possible values 

2425:     for $\n \nu(n)$.

2426:     So there is a $q\leq p$ which $\mathord< n$-decides

2427:     $\n\nu(n)=\n\eta(n-1)$ for all $n$.

2428: \end{proof}

2429: 

2430: In the following two sections, we will show that $P$ forces

2431: $\kappa_\epsilon\leq \myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$ and $

2432: \mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}\leq \kappa_\epsilon$.  This proves

2433: Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}, since $\myc_{f,g}\leq  \mycfa_{f,g}$ for all $(f,g)$.

2434: 

2435: \section{$P_\epsilon$ adds a $\forall$-cover}\label{sec:forall}

2436: 

2437: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:forall}

2438:   $P$ forces $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}\leq \kappa_\epsilon$.

2439: \end{Lem}

2440: 

2441: One nice way to formulate the proof is the following: $P_\epsilon$ is a complete

2442: subforcing and forces $2^\al0=\kappa_\epsilon$. And in the $P$-extension

2443: $V[G]$, the set of slaloms that are in the $P_\epsilon$-extension $V[G\cap

2444: P_\epsilon]$ form a $(\forall,f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$-cover.

2445: 

2446: However, to be able to generalize the proof to the uncountable

2447: case of Section~\ref{sec:uncountable}, we will not use the complete

2448: subforcing. Instead we will use pure decision more explicitly.

2449: 

2450: \begin{proof}

2451:   Let $p_0\in P$ and

2452:   $\n r$ be a $P$-name for a real such that $\n r(n)<f_\epsilon(n)$

2453:   for all $n$.

2454:   We will show that

2455:   \begin{equation}

2456:      \label{eq:rapiddense}

2457:      \parbox{0.8\textwidth}{

2458:      % \raggedright

2459:      There is a $q\leq p_0$ and a way

2460:      to determine an $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$-slalom

2461:      $\n S(n)$ from $\prodval(q,\mathord \leq n)$ restricted to $I_\epsilon$,

2462:      such that $q$ forces $\n r(n)\in \n S(n)$ for all $n$.}

2463:   \end{equation}

2464: 

2465:   More explicitly, we find a $q$ and a function $\text{eval}$ which

2466:   assigns to each $t\restriction I_\epsilon$ for $t\in \prodval(q,\mathord \leq n)$

2467:   a set $S^t(n)$ such that $S^t(n)\subseteq f_\epsilon(n)$,

2468:   $|S^t(n)|\leq g_\epsilon(n)$ and such that $q$ forces the following:

2469:   If $t$ is compatible with the generic filter, then $\n r(n)\in S^t(n)$.

2470: 

2471:   Assume that we can do this for all names $\n r$. 

2472:   Note that there are only $\kappa_\epsilon$ many possible assignments

2473:   as above: There are only $\kappa_\epsilon^\al0=\kappa_\epsilon$ many 

2474:   possible sequences $q\restriction I_\epsilon$, and $2^\al0$ many 

2475:   ways to continuously read  a real from $q\restriction I_\epsilon$.

2476:   Each assignment, together with the $P$-generic filter, determines 

2477:   a slalom $\n S$. Let $X$ be the set of all possible assignments.

2478:   This corresponds to a $P$-name $Y$ of a family (of size $\kappa_\epsilon$)

2479:   of $(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$-slaloms, and according

2480:   to~\eqref{eq:rapiddense}, the following holds in the $P$-extension:

2481:   For every $\eta\in\prod_{n\in\omega} f_\epsilon(n)$ there is a slalom $\n S$

2482:   in $Y$ covering $\eta$.

2483:   This implies $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}\leq

2484:   \kappa_\epsilon$.

2485:   

2486:   So it remains to show~\eqref{eq:rapiddense}.

2487:   First pick a $p\leq p_0$ rapidly reading $\n r$ as in~\ref{cor:variousbigness}(3), i.e.\ $p$ $\mathord\leq n$-decides

2488:   $\n r(n)$ for all $n\in\omega$.

2489:   We can assume that $\nor(p_\alpha(n))>3$ for all $\alpha\in\supp(p,n)$.

2490:   We set $\dom(q)=\dom(p)$ and

2491:   $\trunklg(q,\alpha)=\trunklg(p,\alpha)$, 

2492:   and we will define $q(\alpha,m)$ (for all $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$) as

2493:   well as $\n S(m)$ by induction on $m$. We will 

2494:   find $q(\alpha,m)\in \cS(p(\alpha,m))$ such that 

2495:   the norm decreases by at most 2. Then $q$ 

2496:   automatically is a valid condition in $P$ and stronger than $p$.

2497: 

2498: 

2499:   Fix $m\in\omega$. Set $M\DEFEQ \supp(p,m)\cap I_\epsilon$.

2500:   ($M$ stands for ``medium''.)

2501:   According  to ``separated support''~\ref{cor:variousbigness}(2),

2502:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:qwrr}

2503:     \alpha\in \supp(p,m)\setminus I_\epsilon\text{ implies }

2504:    f_{\alpha}(m)\neq f_\epsilon(m).

2505:   \end{equation}

2506:   So either $f_{\alpha}(m)<f_\epsilon(m)$, 

2507:   in this case we set $\alpha\in S$ (for ``small'');

2508:   or $f_{\alpha}(m)> f_\epsilon(m)$, then we set $\alpha\in L$

2509:   (for ``large'').

2510:   So $\supp(p,m)$ is partitioned into $S$, $M$ and $L$.

2511:   We set $q(\alpha,m)=p(\alpha,m)$ for $\alpha\in S\cup M$.

2512:  

2513:   $p$ $\mathord\leq m$-decides $\n r(m)$, i.e.\ there is a function $F$

2514:   that calculates $\n r(m)<f_\epsilon(m)$:

2515:   \[

2516:     F: \prodval(p,\mathord<m)

2517:        \times

2518:        \left(\prod_{\alpha\in S\cup M\cup L}\val(p_\alpha(m))\right)

2519:        \fnto

2520:        f_\epsilon (m).

2521:   \]

2522: 

2523:   {\em Step 1:} 

2524:   Assume $L$ is nonempty (otherwise continue with Step~2).

2525:   \[

2526:     \left|\prod_{\alpha\in S\cup M}\val(p_\alpha(m))\right|

2527:     \leq \bfH_\epsilon(m)^{m-1}=f_\epsilon(m)^{m-1}.

2528:   \]

2529:   So we can rewrite $F$ as

2530:   \[

2531:     F': \prod_{\alpha\in L}\val(p_\alpha(m))\fnto

2532:         f_\epsilon (m)^{\varphi(\mathord<m) f_\epsilon(m)^{m-1}}

2533:         < f_\epsilon (m)^{ f_\epsilon (m)^m}.

2534:   \]

2535:   If we set $B=\min(\{g_\alpha(m):\, m\in L\})$, then

2536:   $f_\epsilon(m)<B$, and $B^{B^m}<\EXP(B,m,3)$. 

2537:   According to

2538:   Corollary~\ref{cor:biggerbigness},

2539:   there are $q(\alpha,m)\in \cS(p(\alpha,m)$ for $\alpha\in L$

2540:   such that

2541:   $F'$ restricted to $\prod_{\alpha\in L}\val(q(\alpha,m))$ is constant

2542:   and $\nor(q(\alpha,m))>\nor(p(\alpha,m))-r(m)\cdot (m+3)$.

2543:   This defines $q(\alpha,m)$ for $\alpha\in L$. So we now know

2544:   $q(\alpha,m)$ for all $m$.

2545: 

2546:   {\em Step 2:} 

2547:   So (modulo $q$)

2548:   we have eliminated the dependence of $\n r(m)$ 

2549:   on $L$, and are left with

2550:   \[

2551:     F: \prodval(q,\mathord<m)

2552:        \times

2553:        \left(\prod_{\alpha\in S\cup M}\val(q(\alpha,m))\right)

2554:        \fnto

2555:        f_\epsilon (m).

2556:   \]

2557:   We now define $\n S(m)$, more exactly the

2558:   evaluation that maps $t\in\prodval(q,\mathord\leq m)\restriction I_\epsilon$

2559:   to $S^t(m)$. So fix such a $t\in \prod_{\alpha\in M}\val(q(\alpha,m))$.

2560: 

2561:   $q\wedge t$ allows for at most

2562:   $\varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot \prod_{\alpha\in S}\val(q(\alpha,m))$ 

2563:   many possible values for $\n r(m)$.

2564: 

2565:   If $S$ is nonempty, let $\epsilon'$ be such that

2566:   $f_{\epsilon'}(m)=\max\{f_\alpha(m):\, \alpha\in S\}$. Then 

2567:   $\prod_{\alpha\in S}\val(p_\alpha(m))\leq f_{\epsilon'}(m)^m$.

2568:   So we get 

2569:   $\varphi(\mathord<m)\cdot f_{\epsilon'}(m)^m<g_\epsilon(m)$

2570:   many possible values for $\n r(m)$.

2571:   (If $S$ is empty,

2572:   we just get $\varphi(\mathord<m)$ many possibilities.)

2573:   So we can set $S^t(m)$ to be this set of possible values.

2574: \end{proof}

2575: 

2576: \section{There is no small $\exists$-cover}\label{sec:exists}

2577: \begin{Lem}\label{lem:exists} (CH) $P$ forces

2578:   $\kappa_\epsilon \leq \myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$.

2579: \end{Lem}

2580: 

2581: \begin{proof}

2582:   Assume towards a contradiction that $p_0$ forces that $\n\SlFam$ is an

2583:   $(\exists,f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)$-cover, $\al1\leq \lambda<\kappa_\epsilon$

2584:   and $\n\SlFam=\{\n S_i:\, i\in\lambda\}$.

2585: 

2586:   For every $i$, the set of $p'\leq p_0$ which 

2587:   rapidly\footnote{as in Corollary~\ref{cor:variousbigness}(3)}

2588:   reads $\n S_i$ is predense under $p_0$.

2589:   Because of $\al2$-cc, we can find a set

2590:   $D_i$ of such $p'$

2591:   which is predense under $p_0$ and has size $\al1$.

2592:   So

2593:   \[

2594:     J=\bigcup_{i\in\lambda,p'\in D_i}\dom(p')

2595:   \]

2596:   has size $\lambda$.

2597:   Since $\card{I_\epsilon}=\kappa_\epsilon>\lambda$, there

2598:   is a $\beta\in I_\epsilon\setminus J$. Fix this $\beta$.

2599: 

2600:   Let $p_1\leq p_0$ decide the $i$ such that  

2601:   $\n \eta_\beta(n)\in \n S_i(n)$ for infinitely many $n$. We

2602:   set $\n S\DEFEQ \n S_i$.

2603:   We can assume $\beta\in\dom(p_1)$, so we have

2604:   \begin{equation}\label{eq:bdomq}

2605:     \beta\in\dom(p_1)\cap I_\epsilon\setminus J.

2606:   \end{equation}

2607:   Let $p\leq p_1$ be stronger than some $p'\in D_i$,

2608:   and let $\nor(p(\alpha,m))>10$ for all $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$.

2609:   So modulo $p$, we can determine 

2610:   the value of $\n S(n)$ from $t\restriction J$

2611:   for $t\in \prodval(p,\mathord\leq n)$.\footnote{More formally: Let $X$ 

2612:     be the set $\{t\restriction J:\, t\in\prodval(p,\mathord\leq n)\}$.

2613:     For each $x\in X$ there is an $S^x_n$ such that $p$ forces:

2614:     $(\forall \alpha\in J)\, x(\alpha)<\n\eta_\alpha\,\rightarrow\,

2615:     \n S(n)=S^x_n$.}

2616: 

2617:   We will show towards a contradiction 

2618:   that we can strengthen $p$ to a $q$ such that

2619:   for all $n\geq \trunklg(p,\beta)$ the following holds:

2620:   the generic $\n \eta_\beta(n)$ (which is  in

2621:   $\val(q(\beta,n))$ and less than  $f_\epsilon(n)$)

2622:   avoids every possible element of $\n S(n)$,

2623:   (which is determined by $q(\alpha,m)$

2624:   for $m\leq n$ and $\alpha\neq \beta$).

2625:   In other words, we can make $\n\eta_\beta$ run away from

2626:   $\n S$ at every height above the trunk.

2627:   So $q$ forces that $\n \eta_\beta(n)\notin \n S(n)$

2628:   for all $n\geq \trunklg(p,\beta)$, a contradiction.

2629: 

2630:   We set $\dom(q)=\dom(p)$, $\trunklg(q,\alpha)=\trunklg(p,\alpha)$,

2631:   and define $q(\alpha,m)$ (for all $\alpha\in\supp(p,m)$)

2632:   by induction on $m$. We will find a

2633:   $q(\alpha,m)\in \cS(p(\alpha,m))$ so that the

2634:   norm decreases by at most 2. This guarantees that

2635:   $q$ is a condition in $P$ and stronger than $p$.

2636: 

2637:   Fix an $n\geq \trunklg(p,\beta)$.

2638:   Set $A\DEFEQ\supp(p,n)$. So $\beta\in A$, and

2639:   without loss of generality $\card{A}\geq 2$.

2640:   According to the definition of $P$, $\card{A}<n$.

2641: 

2642:   Similarly to the previous section, we will partition 

2643:   $A$ into the large indices $L$, the small ones $S$ and

2644:   $\{\beta\}$. However, we cannot assume that 

2645:   $A\cap I_\epsilon=\{\beta\}$, so the partition

2646:   will not only be based on membership in $I_{\epsilon'}$,

2647:   but has to be ``finer''. $\n S(n)$ only depends

2648:   on $S\cup L$ (and the very small set $\prodval(p,\mathord<n)$).

2649:   Again, we first use bigness to eliminate the dependence of $\n S(n)$

2650:   on the large part. And the small part is sufficiently small

2651:   so that $\n\eta_\beta(n)$ (i.e.\ $q(n,\beta)$) 

2652:   avoids all the possible elements of $\n S(n)$.

2653:   We now do this in more detail:

2654: 

2655: 

2656:   \begin{figure}[tb]

2657: %    \newcommand{\mads}[1]{\ar[d]_-{\txt{\footnotesize S}}^-{#1}}

2658: %    \newcommand{\madb}[1]{\ar[d]_-{\txt{\footnotesize B}}^-{#1}}

2659:     \newcommand{\mads}[1]{\ar[d]_-{#1\text{-small}}}

2660:     \newcommand{\madb}[1]{\ar[d]^-{\mathord\geq#1\text{-big}}}

2661:     \centerline{\xymatrix@R-1em{

2662:       \cc^0_{\alpha_0}           \mads{K_0} & \cc^0_{\alpha_1}           \madb{K_0}& \dots &  \cc^0_{\alpha_m}=\cc^0_\beta\madb{K_0}    & \dots & \cc^0_{\alpha_{\card{A}-2}} \madb{K_0}        & \cc^0_{\alpha_{\card{A}-1}}\madb{K_0}\\

2663:       \cd_{\alpha_0}                        & \cc^1_{\alpha_1}           \mads{K_1}     & \dots &  \cc^1_{\alpha_m}            \madb{K_1}    & \dots & \cc^1_{\alpha_{\card{A}-2}} \madb{K_1}        & \cc^1_{\alpha_{\card{A}-1}}\madb{K_1}\\

2664:                                             & \cd_{\alpha_1}                            &       &  \vdots                      \madb{K_{m-1}}&       & \vdots                                             & \vdots                                    \\

2665:                                             &                                           &       &  \cc^m_{\alpha_m}            \mads{K_m=K}       & \dots & \vdots                                             & \vdots                                    \\

2666:                                             &                                           &       &  \cd_{\alpha_m}=\cd_{\beta}                     & \dots & \vdots                      \mads{K_{\card{A}-2}}  & \vdots                     \madb{K_{\card{A}-2}}    \\

2667:                                             &                                           &       &                                                 &       & \cd_{\alpha_{\card{A}-2}}                                   & \cd_{\alpha_{\card{A}-1}}                 \\

2668:     }}

2669:     \caption{\label{fig:uiq}}

2670:   \end{figure}

2671:   Set $\cc^0_\alpha\DEFEQ p(\alpha,n)$ for $\alpha\in A$.

2672:   Assume that for $l\geq 0$ we already have 

2673:   a list $(\alpha_k)_{k<l}$ of elements of $A$

2674:   and creatures

2675:   $(\cc^l_\alpha)_{\alpha\in A\setminus\{\alpha_0,\dots,\alpha_{l-1}\}}$.

2676:   Each $\cc^l_\alpha$ is $(K^l_\alpha,n,r(n))$-decisive

2677:   for some $K^l_\alpha$.

2678:   Set $K_l\DEFEQ\min(\{K^l_\alpha:\, \alpha\in A\setminus

2679:   \{\alpha_0,\dots,\alpha_{l-1}\}\})$,

2680:   and choose

2681:   $\alpha_l$ such that $K_{\alpha_l}^l=K_l$.

2682:   Let  $\cd_{\alpha_l}$ be  a $K_l$-small successor of $\cc^l_{\alpha_l}$.

2683:   For $\alpha\in A\setminus \{\alpha_0,\dots,\alpha_{l}\}$, let

2684:   $\cc^{l+1}_\alpha$ be 

2685:   a $K_l$-big successor of $\cc^l_{\alpha}$.

2686:   Cf.\ Figure~\ref{fig:uiq}.

2687:   Iterate this construction $\card{A}-1$ times.

2688:   So there remains one

2689:   $\alpha$ that has not been listed as an $\alpha_l$, set 

2690:   $\alpha_{\card{A}-1}=\alpha$ and

2691:   $\cd_{\alpha_{\card{A}-1}}=\cc^{\card{A}-1}_\alpha$.

2692:   

2693:   Let $m$ be such that $\beta=\alpha_m$, and set 

2694:   \[

2695:     K\DEFEQ K_m,

2696:     \quad

2697:     S\DEFEQ \{\alpha_l:\, l<m\},

2698:     \quad

2699:     L\DEFEQ \{\alpha_l:\, l>m\}.

2700:   \]

2701:   So $A$ is partitioned into the three parts $\{\beta\}$, $S$ and

2702:   $L$. We get:

2703:   \begin{itemize}

2704:     \item $\cd_\alpha\in \cS(p(\alpha,n))$,

2705:       $\nor(\cd_\alpha)\geq \nor(p(\alpha,n))-(n-1)\cdot r(n)$.

2706: %    \item $K_{l+1}>2^{K_l^n}$, since $\cc^{l+1}_{\alpha_{l+1}}$

2707: %      is hereditarily $2^{K^n_l}$-big and

2708: %      $\card{\val(\cd_{\alpha_{l+1}})}\leq K_{l+1}$.

2709:     \item $\prod_{\alpha\in S}\card{\val(\cd_\alpha)}\leq K^{n-2}_{m-1}<K$.

2710:     \item $\cd_\beta$ is hereditarily 

2711:       $K_{m-1}$-big\footnote{even

2712:        $2^{K^n_{m-1}}$-big. Provided of course that $S$ is nonempty,

2713:        otherwise there is no $K_{m-1}$.}

2714:        and $\card{\val(\cd_\beta)}\leq K$.

2715: %    \item $\varphi(\mathord<n)<K_0$,

2716: %      since $c^0_{\alpha_0}$ is $\varphi(\mathord<n)$-big.

2717: %    \item $\cd_\beta$ is hereditarily $2^{K^n_{m-1}}$-big (and

2718: %      $g_\epsilon(n)$-big), and $\card{\val(\cd)}\leq K$.

2719:     \item If $\alpha\in L$, then $\cd_\alpha$ is hereditarily

2720:       $K$-big.\footnote{even $2^{K^n}$-big.}

2721: 

2722:   \end{itemize}

2723:   $J\cap \supp(p,n)\subseteq S\cup L$, so

2724:   $\n S (n)$ is determined by

2725:   $\prodval(p,\mathord<n)\times \prod_{\alpha\in S\cup

2726:   L}\val(p(\alpha,n))$.

2727:   We set $q(\alpha,m)=\cd_\alpha$ for all $\alpha\in S$.

2728:   We also set $q(\beta,m)=\cd_m$ for now. (But we may further

2729:   decrease $q(\beta,m)$ in Step~2.) We

2730:   are only interested in the

2731:   elements of $\n S (n)$ that are possible values of

2732:   $\n\eta_\beta(n)$,

2733:   in other words we are interested in

2734:   $\n S (n)\cap \val(\cd_\beta)$.

2735:   This part has size at most $K$.

2736:   So we get a function

2737:   \[

2738:     F: \prodval(p,\mathord<n)\times

2739:     \left(\prod_{\alpha\in S}\val(\cd_\alpha)\right)\times

2740:     \left(\prod_{\alpha\in L}\val(\cd_\alpha)\right)\fnto

2741:     \binom{K}{g_\epsilon(n)}.

2742:   \]

2743:   {\em Step 1:} Assume  $L$ is non-empty (otherwise

2744:   continue with Step~2).

2745:   Note that

2746:   $\binom{K}{g_\epsilon(n)}\leq K^{g_\epsilon(n)}$ and

2747:   $\varphi(\mathord<n)< g_\epsilon(n)<K$.

2748:   So we can rewrite $F$ as

2749:   \[

2750:     F': \prod_{\alpha\in L}\val(\cd_\alpha)\fnto

2751:      (K^K)^{K\times K}=K^{K^3}.

2752:   \]

2753:   Since $\cd_\alpha$ is decisive and (hereditarily)

2754:   $K$-big for $\alpha\in L$

2755:   and $\EXP(K,n,3)>K^{K^3}$,

2756:   we can find 

2757:   $F'$-homogeneous

2758:   $q(\alpha,n)\in\cS(\cd_\alpha)$ for

2759:   $\alpha\in L$ such that

2760:   the norm decreases by at most $(n+1)\cdot r(n)$,

2761:   cf.\ Corollary~\ref{cor:biggerbigness}.

2762:   

2763: 

2764:   {\em Step 2:}

2765:   So modulo $q$ we have eliminated $L$ and can rewrite $F$ as

2766:   \[

2767:     F: \prodval(p,\mathord<n)\times

2768:     \left(\prod_{\alpha\in S}\val(\cd_\alpha)\right)\fnto

2769:     \binom{K}{g_\epsilon(n)}.

2770:   \]

2771:   Let $X$ be the image of $F$ (i.e.\ the set of possible values

2772:   of $\n S(n)\cap \val(\cd_\beta)$). $X$ has size at most

2773:   $\varphi(\mathord<n)\cdot K^{n-2}_{m-1}<\EXP(K_{m-1},n,2)$.

2774:   So according to~\ref{lem:increasebigness}(5), 

2775:   we can strengthen $\cd_\beta$ to avoid $X$,

2776:   decreasing the norm by at most $3\cdot r(n)$. 

2777: \end{proof}

2778: 

2779: 

2780: \section{Uncountably many invariants}\label{sec:uncountable}

2781: 

2782: We construct natural numbers

2783: $(f_{n,l})_{n\in \omega,-1\leq l\leq n}$, and

2784: $(g_{n,l})_{n\in \omega,0\leq l\leq n}$ 

2785: so that $0=f_{0,-1}$ and (for $n,l\in\omega$) $f_{n+1,-1}=f_{n,n}$ and

2786: $f_{n,l-1}< g_{n,l}< f_{n,l}$.

2787: We set

2788: $\fmax(n)=f_{n,n}$, 

2789: $\varphi(\mathord =n)=\fmax(n)^n$,

2790: $\varphi(\mathord <n)=\prod_{m<m}\varphi(\mathord =m)$

2791: and $r(n)=1/(n^2\varphi(\mathord<n))$.

2792: So  we get the following picture:\\

2793: \setlength{\unitlength}{5mm}

2794: \centerline{\begin{picture}(23,2)(-0.4,-1.2)

2795:   \put( 0,0){\line(1,0){21}}

2796:   \put( 0,-0.3){\line(0,1){0.6}}

2797:   \put( 0,-1){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $0$}}

2798:   \put( 3,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

2799:   \put( 3,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $g_{0,0}$}}

2800:   \put( 6,-0.3){\line(0,1){0.6}}

2801:   \put( 6,-1){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $f_{0,0}=\fmax(0)$}}

2802:   \put( 9,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

2803:   \put( 9,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $g_{1,0}$}}

2804:   \put(12,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

2805:   \put(12,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $f_{1,0}$}}

2806:   \put(15,-0.15){\line(0,1){0.3}}

2807:   \put(15,-0.7){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $g_{1,1}$}}

2808:   \put(18,-0.3){\line(0,1){0.6}}

2809:   \put(18,-1){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize $f_{1,1}=\fmax(1)$}}

2810:   \put(20,-0.5){\makebox(0,0){\footnotesize \dots}}

2811: \end{picture}}

2812: We require (for all $n,l\in\omega$)

2813: \begin{itemize}

2814:   \item $f_{n,l}\geq \Psi(n,g_{n,l},r(n))$ and

2815:   \item $g_{n,l}\geq \varphi(\mathord<n)f_{n,l-1}^{n}$.

2816: \end{itemize}

2817: (Compare this with~\ref{asm:sufficientlydifferent}.)

2818: Again it is clear that we can construct such sequences by induction.

2819: 

2820: Let $\myinvset$ be the set of $\nu: \omega\to\omega$ such that

2821: $\nu(m)\leq m$ for all $m$. 

2822: For  $\nu\in \myinvset$, we can define

2823: $f_\nu:\omega \to \omega$ by $f_\nu(m)=f_{m,\nu(m)}$, and the same for $g_\nu$.

2824: So we assign to each $\nu\in \myinvset$ cardinal characteristics

2825: $\mycfa_{f_\nu,g_\nu}$ and $\myc_{f_\nu,g_\nu}$.

2826: 

2827: Assume that $X\subset \myinvset$ is countable such that

2828: \begin{equation}\label{eq:wqr2}

2829:   \text{for $\nu\neq \nu'$ in $X$ there is an $n(\nu, \nu')$

2830:   such that $\nu(m)\neq \nu'(m)$ for all $m>n(\nu, \nu')$.}

2831: \end{equation}

2832: Then $(f_\nu,g_\nu)_{\nu\in X}$ is a suitable sequence 

2833: as in Assumption~\ref{asm:sufficientlydifferent}.

2834: 

2835: \begin{uRem}

2836:   We can of course find an uncountable set $X$ satisfying~\eqref{eq:wqr2}

2837:   as well.

2838:   We could try to define a forcing $P_I$ just as in the

2839:   countable case, to force an uncountable version of

2840:   Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}. However,

2841:   we need ``separated support''~\ref{cor:variousbigness}(2)

2842:   for~\eqref{eq:qwrr}. So we have to add appropriate

2843:   requirements for conditions in $P$,

2844:   in the style of $\trunklg^\text{min}$, this time depending 

2845:   on the pair $\nu,\nu'$, to guarantee that 

2846:   the maximum of the trunk-lengths at $\alpha\in I_\nu$

2847:   and $\beta\in I_{\nu'}$ is bigger than the $n(\nu,\nu')$.

2848:   However, such requirements lead to

2849:   the following problem:

2850:   Assume that $Y\subseteq \myinvset$ is countable and dense,

2851:   and the domain of $p$ contains elements of $I_\nu$ 

2852:   for each $\nu\in Y$. Then we cannot enlarge the domain 

2853:   of $p$ to contain some $\nu'\notin Y$.\footnote{%

2854:     In more detail: Let $f:Y\to\omega$ be such that 

2855:     for all $\nu\in Y$, there is an $\alpha\in\dom(p)\cap I_\nu$

2856:     such that $\trunklg(p,\alpha)+1<f(\nu)$. 

2857:     Enumerate $Y$ as $\{\nu_0,\nu_1,\dots\}$.

2858:     Then construct $\nu'\in\myinvset\setminus Y$

2859:     the following way: Pick any $\nu^0\in Y$ and pick a finite

2860:     $\nu'^0$ extending $\nu^0\restriction f(\nu^0)$, such that

2861:     $\nu'^0(m)\neq \nu_0(m)$ for some $m$.

2862:     Given $\nu'^l$, pick any $\nu^{l+1}\in Y$

2863:     extending $\nu'^l$, and pick

2864:     $\nu'^{l+1}$ extending $\nu^{l+1}\restriction f(\nu^{l+1})$

2865:     such that $\nu'^{l+1}(m)\neq \nu_{l+1}(m)$ for some $m$.

2866:     Set $\nu'=\bigcup_{l\in\omega} \nu'^l$. 

2867:     Assume that there is a $q\leq p$ such that $\beta\in\dom(q)\cap I_{\nu'}$

2868:     and $\trunklg(q,\beta)=m$. Only finitely many trunk-lengths

2869:     in $\dom(p)$ were increased,

2870:     so pick some $l$ such that $f(\nu^l)>m$ and 

2871:     such that not trunk in $I_{\nu^l}$ was increased.

2872:     By the definition of $f$,

2873:     $\alpha\in\supp(q,m)$ for some $\alpha\in I_{\nu^{l}}$.

2874:     $\nu'$ extends $\nu^{l}\restriction f(\nu^{l})$,

2875:     so $\nu^{l}(m)=\nu'(m)$ (and $\nu^{l}\neq \nu'$), 

2876:     which contradicts separated support.

2877:   }

2878:   So $p$ forces that the generic object does not contain

2879:   anything in $I_{\nu'}$. But then our proofs do not

2880:   work any more, cf.\ e.g.~\eqref{eq:bdomq}.

2881:   To fix this problem, we will modify the forcing $P$ in the following

2882:   way: As before, we choose for each $\epsilon\in\om1$ a cardinal

2883:   $\kappa_\epsilon$ and the index set $I_\epsilon$ of

2884:   size $\kappa_\epsilon$. However, we do not fix a $\nu\in\myinvset$

2885:   for $\epsilon$. Instead, each condition $p$ chooses 

2886:   $\nu(\epsilon)$ for each $\epsilon$ in its domain. 

2887:   This makes Theorem~\ref{thm:uncountable} slightly weaker than

2888:   Theorem~\ref{thm:ctbl}, since we do not know in the ground model

2889:   which $\nu$ will be assigned to a $\kappa_\epsilon$.

2890: \end{uRem}

2891: 

2892: 

2893: We can now reformulate Theorem~\ref{thm:uncountable}:

2894: \begin{Thm}

2895:   Assume CH, assume

2896:   that $\kappa_\epsilon=\kappa_\epsilon^\al0$ for $\epsilon\in\om1$,

2897:   and that $(f_\nu,g_\nu)_{\nu\in\myinvset}$ are as above. Then there

2898:   is a proper, $\al2$-cc, $\omega^\omega$-bounding partial order $R$ which

2899:   forces:

2900:   For each $\epsilon\in\om1$ there is a $\nu\in \myinvset$

2901:   such that $\mycfa_{f_{\nu},g_{\nu}}=

2902:   \myc_{f_{\nu},g_{\nu}}=\kappa_\epsilon$ 

2903:   for all $\epsilon\in\om1$.

2904: \end{Thm}

2905: (Here $\myinvset$ denotes the set in $V$, not the evaluation of the definition

2906: of $\myinvset$ in $V[G]$.)

2907: 

2908: As in the proof of Section~\ref{sec:countable},

2909: we pick for each

2910: $\nu\in \myinvset$ and $n\in\omega$ a creating pair $(\cK_\nu(n),\cS_\nu(n))$,

2911: with $\bfH_\nu=f_\nu$ and $\bfF_\nu(n)=b$,

2912: which is $(g_\nu(n),r(n))$-big, $r(n)$-halving and $(n,r(n))$-decisive.

2913: 

2914: We let $I$ be the disjoint union of $I_\epsilon$ ($\epsilon\in

2915: \om1$), each $I_\epsilon$ has size

2916: $\kappa_\epsilon$.

2917: 

2918: From here on, we assume CH. We now define the forcing notion $R$:

2919: %A condition $p \in P$ is similar to one in $P$,

2920: %but for each $\epsilon$ with $\epsilon\cap \dom(p)\neq \emptyset$ we choose a

2921: %$\nu\in\myinvset$, and $p(\alpha,m)$ is a creature in $\cK_{\nu}(m)$. Also we

2922: %have to make sure to get ``separated support''.

2923: \begin{Def}

2924:   A condition $p$ in $R$ consists of a countable 

2925:   subset $\dom(p)$ of $I$, of objects $p(\alpha,n)$ for $\alpha\in \dom(p),

2926:   n\in\omega$, and of functions $\trunklg(p):\dom(p)\to \omega$  

2927:   and $\myinv(p):\dom(p)\to \myinvset$

2928:   satisfying the following ($\alpha,\beta\in\dom(p)$): 

2929:   \begin{itemize}

2930:     \item $\myinv(p,\alpha)=\myinv(p,\beta)$ iff

2931:       $\alpha,\beta$ are in the same $I_\epsilon$.

2932:     \item

2933:       If $n<\trunklg(p,\alpha)$, then

2934:       $p(\alpha,n)\in \bfH_{\myinv(p,\alpha)}(n)$.

2935:       \\

2936:       $\bigcup_{n<\trunklg(p)}p(\alpha,n)$ is called trunk of $p$ at $\alpha$.

2937:     \item

2938:       If $n\geq \trunklg(p,\alpha)$, then $p(\alpha,n)\in \cK_{\myinv(p,\alpha)}(n)$

2939:       and $\nor(p(\alpha,n))>0$.

2940:     \item

2941:       $\card{\supp(p,n)}<n$ for all $n>0$.

2942:     \item

2943:       Moreover, $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(\card{\supp(p,n)}/n)=0$.

2944:     \item

2945:       $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(\min(\{\nor(p(\alpha,n)):\, \alpha\in\supp(p,n)\}))= \infty$.

2946:     \item \em{(Separated support.)}

2947:       If $\alpha,\beta\in\supp(p,n)$, $\alpha\in I_\epsilon$,

2948:       $\beta\in I_{\epsilon'}$,  and $\epsilon\neq \epsilon'$, then 

2949:       $\myinv(p,\alpha)(n)\neq\myinv(p,\beta)(n)$. 

2950:   \end{itemize}

2951: \end{Def}

2952: ($\supp(p,n)$ is again the set of $\alpha\in I$ such that

2953: $\trunklg(p,\alpha)\leq n$ .) 

2954: 

2955: Another way to formulate the last point is: If $\alpha,\beta\in\dom(p)$,

2956: $\alpha\in I_\epsilon$, $\beta\in I_{\epsilon'}$, and $\epsilon\neq \epsilon'$,

2957: then $\myinv(p,\alpha)$ and $\myinv(p,\beta)$ differ above some

2958: $n(\myinv(p,\alpha),\myinv(p,\beta))$ as in~\eqref{eq:wqr2}, and

2959: \begin{equation*}

2960:   \max(\trunklg(p,\alpha),\trunklg(p,\beta))>n(\myinv(p,\alpha),\myinv(p,\beta)).

2961: \end{equation*}

2962: 

2963: The order on $R$ is the natural modification of the one on $P$:

2964: \begin{Def}

2965:   For $p,q$ in $R$, $q\leq p$ if

2966:   \begin{itemize}

2967:     \item $\dom(q)\supseteq \dom(p)$,

2968:     \item $\myinv(q,\alpha)=\myinv(p,\alpha)$ for all $\alpha\in\dom(p)$,

2969:     \item if $\alpha\in\dom(p)$ and $n\in\omega$,

2970:       then $q(\alpha,n)\in\cS_{\myinv(p,\alpha)}(p(\alpha,n))$,

2971:     \item $\trunklg(q,\alpha)= \trunklg(p,\alpha)$ for

2972:           all but finitely many $\alpha\in\dom(p)$.

2973:   \end{itemize}

2974: \end{Def}

2975: 

2976: 

2977: 

2978: $I_\epsilon$ is not a complete subforcing any more (conditions with disjoint

2979: domains are generally not compatible, since the union can violate separated

2980: support). But we still get:

2981: \begin{Lem}

2982:   $R$ is $\al2$-cc.

2983: \end{Lem}

2984: \begin{proof}

2985:   Assume towards a contradiction that $A$ is an antichain

2986:   of size $\al2$. By a $\Delta$-system argument, we 

2987:   can assume that $\dom(p)\cap \dom(q)=u$

2988:   for all distinct $p,q$ in $A$. We fix an enumeration 

2989:   $\alpha^p_0,\alpha^p_1,\dots$ of $\dom(p)$ for each $p\in A$.

2990:   By a pigeon hole argument, we 

2991:   can assume that the following objects and statements

2992:   are independent of $p\in A$ ($n,i\in\omega$, $\beta\in u$,

2993:   $\epsilon\in\om1$): ``$\alpha^p_i=\beta$'', ``$\alpha^p_i\in I_\epsilon$'',

2994:   $\trunklg(p,\alpha^p_i)$, $\myinv(p,\alpha^p_i)$, and $p(\alpha^p_i,n)$.

2995: 

2996:   So given distinct elements $p,q$ of $A$, we again 

2997:   increase finitely many of the stems to guarantee that

2998:   $\supp(p\cup q,n)$ has size less than $n$ for all $n$. 

2999:   Then the resulting $r$ is a condition in $R$: To 

3000:   see e.g.\ separated support, assume that 

3001:   $\alpha,\beta\in\supp(r,n)$. We can assume that

3002:   $\alpha=\alpha^p_i$ and $\beta=\alpha^q_j$ and that

3003:   $\myinv(p,\alpha^p_i)\neq \myinv(q,\alpha^q_j)=\myinv(p,\alpha^p_j)$.

3004:   Since $p$ satisfies separated support, 

3005:   $\myinv(p,\alpha^p_i)(n)\neq \myinv(p,\alpha^p_j)(n)$.

3006: \end{proof}

3007: 

3008: \begin{Lem} $R$ adds a generic real $\n\eta_\alpha$ for all $\alpha\in I$.

3009:   In other words, the set of conditions $q$ with $\alpha\in\dom(q)$ 

3010:   is dense.

3011: \end{Lem}

3012: 

3013: \begin{proof} Assume $\alpha\in I_\epsilon$.

3014:   Fix $p\in R$. We find a $q\leq p$ with $\dom(q)=\dom(p)\cup\{\alpha\}$.

3015: 

3016:   {\em Case 1:} $I_\epsilon\cap \dom(p)\neq \emptyset$.

3017:   Then we pick $\beta\in I_\epsilon\cap \dom(p)$

3018:   and choose $\trunklg(q,\alpha)>\trunklg(p,\beta)$

3019:   big enough to guarantee $|\supp(q,n)|<n$ for all $n$.

3020:   Then we choose any $q(\alpha,n)$ with sufficient norm (e.g.\ $n$).

3021: 

3022:   {\em Case 2:} Otherwise we again fix $\trunklg(q,\alpha)$

3023:   big enough to guarantee $|\supp(q,n)|<n$ for all $n$,

3024:   and we have to find

3025:   some $\myinv(q,\alpha)$ satisfying

3026:   separated support (for this $\trunklg(q,\alpha)$).

3027:   Since $|\supp(p,n)|<n$ for all $n$, we can 

3028:   find a $\nu'\in\myinvset$ such that $\nu'(n)$ is not in

3029:   $\{\nu(n):\, \nu=\myinv(p,\beta),\beta\in\supp(p,n)\}$

3030:   for any $n$.

3031:   Set $\myinv(q,\alpha)=\nu'$.

3032:   Then we again choose any $q(\alpha,n)$ with sufficiently 

3033:   increasing norms.

3034:   $q$ satisfies separated support:

3035:   Assume $\beta\in I_{\epsilon'}\cap \supp(p,n)$.

3036:   Then $\myinv(p,\beta)(n)\neq \nu'(n)=\myinv(q,\alpha)(n)$.

3037: \end{proof}

3038: 

3039: 

3040: It turns out that the proofs of Theorems~\ref{thm:prod}

3041: and~\ref{thm:rapid} still work without any change:

3042: \begin{Lem}

3043:   $R$ is proper and $\omega\ho$-bounding.

3044:   If $\delta\in\omega$, $\n \nu(n)$ is a $P$-name and

3045:   $p\in P$ forces that

3046:   $\n \nu(n)<\EXP(\fmax(n-1),n,n\cdot \delta)$ for all $n$,

3047:   then there is a $q\leq p$ which

3048:   $\mathord<n$-decides $\n \nu(n)$ for all $n$ .

3049: \end{Lem}

3050: 

3051: \begin{proof}

3052:   We define $\leq_n$ just as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:prod}.

3053:   Fusion still works: If $q$ is the limit of $p_n$,

3054:   and each $p_n$ satisfies separated support, then so does $q$.

3055:   The proof of pure decision does not require any changes.

3056:   

3057:   For rapid reading, note that each $\cK_\nu(n)$ is $(\fmax(n-1),r(n))$-big.

3058:   Again, the same proof still works without changes.

3059: \end{proof}

3060: 

3061: We can define the $R$-name $\myinv(\epsilon)$ for $\epsilon\in\om1$ to be

3062: $\myinv(p,\alpha)$ for any $p$ in the generic filter and $\alpha\in\dom(p)\cap

3063: I_\epsilon$.  Then we define the $R$-name $f_\epsilon$ to be

3064: $f_{\myinv(\epsilon)}$, and the same for $g_\epsilon$.

3065: 

3066: 

3067: We again get all items of Corollary~\ref{cor:variousbigness}, and can show:

3068: \begin{Lem} 

3069:   $R$ forces $\mycfa_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}\leq \kappa_\epsilon$ and

3070:   $\kappa_\epsilon\leq \myc_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}$.

3071: \end{Lem}

3072: 

3073: \begin{proof}

3074:   The proofs of Lemmas~\ref{lem:forall} and~\ref{lem:exists} still work,

3075:   if we assume that 

3076:   $p_0$ determines $\myinv(\epsilon)$.

3077: \end{proof}

3078: 

3079: 

3080: \bibliographystyle{amsplain}

3081: \bibliography{872}

3082: 

3083: \end{document}

3084: 

3085: