DOCSLIB.ORG

Topics in Descriptive Set Theory (Ma 191)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Topics in Descriptive Set Theory (Ma 191) Topics in Descriptive Set Theory (Ma 191) Lecturer: Alexander Kechris, Notes by: Siddharth Prasad February 21, 2017 1 Lecture 1 (1/5/17) 1.1 Basic Classical Notions Descriptive set theory is the study of “definable” sets and functions in well behaved spaces. Definition 1.1. A Polish space is a topological space given by a complete, separable metric. n Example. R; C; R , separable Hilbert spaces, separable Banach spaces. Definition 1.2. For a Polish space X we are interested in the so called Borel sets in X. We denote by B∼ (X) the class of all Borel subsets of X. These consist of 0 Σ∼ 1(X) = open sets of X( sometimes denoted by G) 0 Π∼ 1(X) = closed sets of X( sometimes denoted by F ) 0 Σ∼ 2(X) = countable unions of closed sets (Fσ) 0 0 Π∼ 2(X) = complements of Σ∼ 2(X) sets = countable intersections of open sets(Gδ) 0 Σ∼ 3(X) = Gδσ sets 0 Π∼ 3(X) = Fσδ sets and so on. This notion can be extended into the transfinite as such: for a countable ordinal ξ > 1 define 0 0 Σ∼ ξ(X) = f[nAn : An 2 Π∼ ξn (X); ξn < ξg 0 0 Π∼ ξ(X) =∼ Σ∼ ξ(X) 0 0 0 ∆∼ ξ(X) = Σ∼ ξ(X) \ Π∼ ξ(X) 1 0 0 0 We have B∼ (X) = [ξ<!1 Σ∼ ξ(X) = [ξ<!1 Π∼ ξ(X) = [ξ<!1 ∆∼ ξ(X), which forms the so called Borel hierarchy. 1 Definition 1.3. We define the analytic sets (A) Σ∼ 1(X) = fprojX (A): A ⊆ X×Y; A Borelg. 1 1 Their complements are the co-analytic sets (CA) Π∼ 1(X) =∼ Σ∼ 1(X). PCA sets are 1 1 1 1 Σ∼ 2(X) = fprojX (A): A ⊆ X ×Y; A is Π∼ 1(X ×Y )g, the CPCA sets are Π∼ 2(X) =∼ Σ∼ 2(X). This hierarchy of sets forms the projective sets or projective hierarchy, denoted by P∼ (X). 1 Remark. A result of Suslin shows that B∼ (X) = ∆∼ 1(X). Definition 1.4. A function f : X ! Y is a Borel (measurable) function if for each open Borel set U ⊆ Y , f −1(U) is borel in X. Effective descriptive set theory: Introduces concepts and methods of computability theory, is a refinement of the classical theory. We introduce a class of so called \transfer theorems", that allow us to work primarily in the so called Baire space N = NN (endowed with product topology). A metric on this space of infinite sequences is given by ( 0 if α = β d(α; β) = 1 2n+1 where n is the least number such that α(n) 6= β(n) The Cantor space is the subset C = 2N ⊆ N . Elements of Baire space are sometimes ∼ referred to irrationals since N = R n Q. Theorem 1.1 (Transfer theorems). N and C denote Baire space and Cantor space respec- tively. • If K is a compact metrizable space, there exists a continuous surjection f : C K. • If X is a Polish space, there exists a continuous surjection f : N X . Moreover, there exists a closed F ⊆ N and there exists a continuous bijection f : F X. • If X is a perfect Polish space, there exists a continuous bijection f : N X. • X and Y are Polish spaces with jXj = jY j () there exists a Borel bijection f : X Y . 1 Example. Analytic sets satisfy the perfect set property, i.e. if A ⊂ X is Σ∼ 1, either jAj ≤ @0 (A is countable) or there is a continuous bijection f : C A. 2 1.2 Review of Computability Theory k Main objects of study are partial computable (recursive) k-ary functions f : N ! N. Recall we can code TMs by numbers, fegk(x1; : : : ; xk) = the function computed by the TM with code e. k ' (e; x¯) = fegk(¯x) is a universal recursive function. m Theorem 1.2 (S-m-n). There is a total recursive function Sn such that fegm+n(¯x; y¯) = m fSn (e; x¯)g(¯y). Theorem 1.3 (Recursion theorem). For each computable function f, there is e such that feg(¯x) = f(e; x¯). k m k ∼ ` A function f : N ! N is computable if its projections are computable. So N =c N m are \computably isomorphic". We have the notion of a coding function hm; ni2 = 2 · 2 (2n + 1) − 1 which gives a bijection h·; ·i : N N. Put hm; n; ki3 = hhm; ni2; ki2. By the nature of the coding function we have that m1; : : : ; mn << hm1; : : : ; mnin. We finally extend this to a bijective coding function on N given by hi = 0, hmi = h0; m + 1i2, and hm0; : : : ; mk−1i = hk − 1; hm0; : : : ; mk−1iki2. k Recall that a set A ⊆ N is computable () the characteristic function χA is com- putable. Recall the following equivalent characterizations for recursively enumerable sets. A ⊆ N is recursively enumerable () A = ; or A = f(N); f total computable () A = f(N) is computable () A = dom(f); f computable 2 () A = proj(B);B ⊆ N ;B computable: k The relation W (e; x¯) () fegk(¯x) # is universal of r.e. subsets of N . Given R r.e., there is e such that W (e; x¯) () R(e; x¯). Proposition 1.4. A function f is recursive () graph(f) is r.e. Proposition 1.5. A set A is recursive () A and ∼ A are r.e. 1.3 Effective Topology We will be primarily working with product spaces over the Baire space N and the naturals k N. Let s = (s0; : : : ; sk−1) 2 N . The neighborhoods Ns = fα 2 N : s ⊆ αg are the so called basic open sets of the Baire space. Then, open sets are of the form [i2NNsi for some sequence (si). The basic open sets for N are singleton sets fng, and likewise the basic open sets in the n m product space N × N are sets of the form Ns1 × · · · × Nsn × fn1g × · · · × fnmg. 3 n m 0 Definition 1.5. A ⊆ N ×N is effectively open or Σ1 iff A = ; or there are total recursive functions f1; : : : ; fn; g1; : : : ; gm such that [ A = Nf1(k) × · · · × Nfn(k) × fg1(k)g · · · × fgm(k)g: k 0 Remark. Note that there are thus only countably many Σ1 sets. n m 0 Proposition 1.6. A ⊆ N × N is Σ1 if and only if there exists a recursive relation n+m R ⊆ N such that (α1; : : : ; αn; n1; : : : ; nm) 2 A () 9kR(¯α1(k);:::; α¯n(k); n1; : : : ; nm); where α¯(k) = hα ki = hα(0); : : : ; α(k − 1)i. 2 Lecture 2 (1/10/17) We prove the proposition from last time: n m 0 Proposition 2.1. A ⊆ N × N is Σ1 if and only if there exists a recursive relation n+m R ⊆ N such that (α1; : : : ; αn; n1; : : : ; nm) 2 A () 9kR(¯α1(k);:::; α¯n(k); n1; : : : ; nm): Proof. For simplicity we will take n = m = 1, so A ⊆ N × N. For the forward direction, if 0 A is Σ1 we can write A = [pNf(p) × fg(p)g for total recursive functions f and g. Then we have (α; n) 2 A () 9p(f(p) ⊆ α&n = g(p)) () 9p9q(f(p) ⊆ α q&n = g(p)) () 9k(f((k)0) ⊆ α &n = g((k)0)) (k)1 9kR(¯α(k); n) where R is clearly recursive. < For the other direction, suppose (α; n) 2 A () 9kR(¯α(k); n), where R ⊆ N N × N is recursive. Then, there are recursive functions f; g such that R = f(f(p); g(p)) : p 2 Ng, so we can write A = [pNf(p) × fg(p)g. < Definition 2.1. A Tree on N is a set of finite sequences T ⊆ N N that is closed under the subsequence relation, i.e. if t 2 T and s ⊆ t, then s 2 T . The set of all infinite branches of T is called the body of T and is denoted by [T ], i.e. [T ] = fα 2 N : 8n(α n 2 T )g. 0 Remark. fA ⊆ N : A 2 Π∼ 1g = f[T ]: T a tree on Ng. 4 Proof. See page 138 of [1]. 0 Proposition 2.2. A ⊆ N is Π1 () 9T (T is recursive &A = [T ]). 0 Proof. For the forward direction assume A ⊆ N is Π1. Then, there exists a recursive R such that α 2 A () 8nR(¯α(n)): Then, take T to be the tree such that s 2 T () R(hsi). Then A = [T ] and we are done. For the reverse implication take R = hT i. Then, α 2 A () 8nR(¯α(n)). m m < Definition 2.2. Trees on N : A tree T on N is a set of (s1; : : : ; sm), si 2 N N, lh(s1) = ··· = lh(sm), such that if (t1; : : : ; tm) ⊆ (s1; : : : ; sm) (meaning ti ⊆ si8i), then (t1; : : : ; tm) 2 T . m 0 So the effective version of the remark is as follows: A ⊆ N is Π1 () 9 a recursive m tree T on N such that A = [T ]. 0 N N Proposition 2.3. Σ1 is closed under ^; _; 9 ; 9 ; 8m ≤ n. N 0 Proof. We will prove closure under 9 . Suppose P ⊆ N × N × N is Σ1. Then, we can write P (α; β; n) () 9tR(¯α(t); β¯(t); n), for some recursive R. We have 9αP (α; β; n) () 9α9tR(¯α(t); β¯(t); n) () 9k9s(R(s; β¯(k); n)&jsj = k) () 9uR0(β¯(u); n); where R0 is recursive. n m Definition 2.3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Descriptive Set Theory of Complete Quasi-Metric Spaces
    数理解析研究所講究録 第 1790 巻 2012 年 16-30 16 Descriptive set theory of complete quasi-metric spaces Matthew de Brecht National Institute of Information and Communications Technology Kyoto, Japan Abstract We give a summary of results from our investigation into extending classical descriptive set theory to the entire class of countably based $T_{0}$ -spaces. Polish spaces play a central role in the descriptive set theory of metrizable spaces, and we suggest that countably based completely quasi-metrizable spaces, which we refer to as quasi-Polish spaces, play the central role in the extended theory. The class of quasi-Polish spaces is general enough to include both Polish spaces and $\omega$ -continuous domains, which have many applications in theoretical computer science. We show that quasi-Polish spaces are a very natural generalization of Polish spaces in terms of their topological characterizations and their complete- ness properties. In particular, a metrizable space is quasi-Polish if and only if it is Polish, and many classical theorems concerning Polish spaces, such as the Hausdorff-Kuratowski theorem, generalize to all quasi-Polish spaces. 1. Introduction Descriptive set theory has proven to be an invaluable tool for the study of separable metrizable spaces, and the techniques and results have been applied to many fields such as functional analysis, topological group theory, and math- ematical logic. Separable completely metrizable spaces, called Polish spaces, play a central role in classical descriptive set theory. These spaces include the space of natural numbers with the discrete topology, the real numbers with the Euclidean topology, as well as the separable Hilbert and Banach spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Games in Descriptive Set Theory, Or: It's All Fun and Games Until Someone Loses the Axiom of Choice Hugo Nobrega
    Games in Descriptive Set Theory, or: it’s all fun and games until someone loses the axiom of choice Hugo Nobrega Cool Logic 22 May 2015 Descriptive set theory and the Baire space Presentation outline [0] 1 Descriptive set theory and the Baire space Why DST, why NN? The topology of NN and its many flavors 2 Gale-Stewart games and the Axiom of Determinacy 3 Games for classes of functions The classical games The tree game Games for finite Baire classes Descriptive set theory and the Baire space Why DST, why NN? Descriptive set theory The real line R can have some pathologies (in ZFC): for example, not every set of reals is Lebesgue measurable, there may be sets of reals of cardinality strictly between |N| and |R|, etc. Descriptive set theory, the theory of definable sets of real numbers, was developed in part to try to fill in the template “No definable set of reals of complexity c can have pathology P” Descriptive set theory and the Baire space Why DST, why NN? Baire space NN For a lot of questions which interest set theorists, working with R is unnecessarily clumsy. It is often better to work with other (Cauchy-)complete topological spaces of cardinality |R| which have bases of cardinality |N| (a.k.a. Polish spaces), and this is enough (in a technically precise way). The Baire space NN is especially nice, as I hope to show you, and set theorists often (usually?) mean this when they say “real numbers”. Descriptive set theory and the Baire space The topology of NN and its many flavors The topology of NN We consider NN with the product topology of discrete N.
    [Show full text]
  • Topology and Descriptive Set Theory
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector TOPOLOGY AND ITS APPLICATIONS ELSEVIER Topology and its Applications 58 (1994) 195-222 Topology and descriptive set theory Alexander S. Kechris ’ Department of Mathematics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA Received 28 March 1994 Abstract This paper consists essentially of the text of a series of four lectures given by the author in the Summer Conference on General Topology and Applications, Amsterdam, August 1994. Instead of attempting to give a general survey of the interrelationships between the two subjects mentioned in the title, which would be an enormous and hopeless task, we chose to illustrate them in a specific context, that of the study of Bore1 actions of Polish groups and Bore1 equivalence relations. This is a rapidly growing area of research of much current interest, which has interesting connections not only with topology and set theory (which are emphasized here), but also to ergodic theory, group representations, operator algebras and logic (particularly model theory and recursion theory). There are four parts, corresponding roughly to each one of the lectures. The first contains a brief review of some fundamental facts from descriptive set theory. In the second we discuss Polish groups, and in the third the basic theory of their Bore1 actions. The last part concentrates on Bore1 equivalence relations. The exposition is essentially self-contained, but proofs, when included at all, are often given in the barest outline. Keywords: Polish spaces; Bore1 sets; Analytic sets; Polish groups; Bore1 actions; Bore1 equivalence relations 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Polish Spaces and Baire Spaces
    Polish spaces and Baire spaces Jordan Bell [email protected] Department of Mathematics, University of Toronto June 27, 2014 1 Introduction These notes consist of me working through those parts of the first chapter of Alexander S. Kechris, Classical Descriptive Set Theory, that I think are impor- tant in analysis. Denote by N the set of positive integers. I do not talk about universal spaces like the Cantor space 2N, the Baire space NN, and the Hilbert cube [0; 1]N, or \localization", or about Polish groups. If (X; τ) is a topological space, the Borel σ-algebra of X, denoted by BX , is the smallest σ-algebra of subsets of X that contains τ. BX contains τ, and is closed under complements and countable unions, and rather than talking merely about Borel sets (elements of the Borel σ-algebra), we can be more specific by talking about open sets, closed sets, and sets that are obtained by taking countable unions and complements. Definition 1. An Fσ set is a countable union of closed sets. A Gδ set is a complement of an Fσ set. Equivalently, it is a countable intersection of open sets. If (X; d) is a metric space, the topology induced by the metric d is the topology generated by the collection of open balls. If (X; τ) is a topological space, a metric d on the set X is said to be compatible with τ if τ is the topology induced by d.A metrizable space is a topological space whose topology is induced by some metric, and a completely metrizable space is a topological space whose topology is induced by some complete metric.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptive Set Theory
    Descriptive Set Theory David Marker Fall 2002 Contents I Classical Descriptive Set Theory 2 1 Polish Spaces 2 2 Borel Sets 14 3 E®ective Descriptive Set Theory: The Arithmetic Hierarchy 27 4 Analytic Sets 34 5 Coanalytic Sets 43 6 Determinacy 54 7 Hyperarithmetic Sets 62 II Borel Equivalence Relations 73 1 8 ¦1-Equivalence Relations 73 9 Tame Borel Equivalence Relations 82 10 Countable Borel Equivalence Relations 87 11 Hyper¯nite Equivalence Relations 92 1 These are informal notes for a course in Descriptive Set Theory given at the University of Illinois at Chicago in Fall 2002. While I hope to give a fairly broad survey of the subject we will be concentrating on problems about group actions, particularly those motivated by Vaught's conjecture. Kechris' Classical Descriptive Set Theory is the main reference for these notes. Notation: If A is a set, A<! is the set of all ¯nite sequences from A. Suppose <! σ = (a0; : : : ; am) 2 A and b 2 A. Then σ b is the sequence (a0; : : : ; am; b). We let ; denote the empty sequence. If σ 2 A<!, then jσj is the length of σ. If f : N ! A, then fjn is the sequence (f(0); : : :b; f(n ¡ 1)). If X is any set, P(X), the power set of X is the set of all subsets X. If X is a metric space, x 2 X and ² > 0, then B²(x) = fy 2 X : d(x; y) < ²g is the open ball of radius ² around x. Part I Classical Descriptive Set Theory 1 Polish Spaces De¯nition 1.1 Let X be a topological space.
    [Show full text]
  • The Envelope of a Pointclass Under a Local Determinacy Hypothesis
    THE ENVELOPE OF A POINTCLASS UNDER A LOCAL DETERMINACY HYPOTHESIS TREVOR M. WILSON Abstract. Given an inductive-like pointclass Γ and assuming the Ax- iom of Determinacy, Martin identified and analyzede the pointclass con- taining the norm relations of the next semiscale beyond Γ, if one exists. We show that much of Martin's analysis can be carriede out assuming only ZF + DCR + Det(∆Γ). This generalization requires arguments from Kechris{Woodin [10] ande e Martin [13]. The results of [10] and [13] can then be recovered as immediate corollaries of the general analysis. We also obtain a new proof of a theorem of Woodin on divergent models of AD+, as well as a new result regarding the derived model at an inde- structibly weakly compact limit of Woodin cardinals. Introduction Given an inductive-like pointclass Γ, Martin introduced a pointclass (which we call the envelope of Γ, following [22])e whose main feature is that it con- tains the prewellorderingse of the next scale (or semiscale) beyond Γ, if such a (semi)scale exists. This work was distributed as \Notes on the nexte Suslin cardinal," as cited in Jackson [3]. It is unpublished, so we use [3] as our reference instead for several of Martin's arguments. Martin's analysis used the assumption of the Axiom of Determinacy. We reformulate the notion of the envelope in such a way that many of its essen- tial properties can by derived without assuming AD. Instead we will work in the base theory ZF+DCR for the duration of the paper, stating determinacy hypotheses only when necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptive Set Theory and Ω-Powers of Finitary Languages Olivier Finkel, Dominique Lecomte
    Descriptive Set Theory and !-Powers of Finitary Languages Olivier Finkel, Dominique Lecomte To cite this version: Olivier Finkel, Dominique Lecomte. Descriptive Set Theory and !-Powers of Finitary Languages. Adrian Rezus. Contemporary Logic and Computing, 1, College Publications, pp.518-541, 2020, Land- scapes in Logic. hal-02898919 HAL Id: hal-02898919 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02898919 Submitted on 14 Jul 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Descriptive Set Theory and ω-Powers of Finitary Languages Olivier FINKEL and Dominique LECOMTE1 March 18, 2020 • CNRS, Universit´ede Paris, Sorbonne Universit´e, Institut de Math´ematiques de Jussieu-Paris Rive Gauche, Equipe de Logique Math´ematique Campus des Grands Moulins, bˆatiment Sophie-Germain, case 7012, 75205 Paris cedex 13, France fi[email protected] •1 Sorbonne Universit´e, Universit´ede Paris, CNRS, Institut de Math´ematiques de Jussieu-Paris Rive Gauche, Equipe d’Analyse Fonctionnelle Campus Pierre et Marie Curie, case 247, 4, place Jussieu, 75 252 Paris cedex 5, France [email protected] •1 Universit´ede Picardie, I.U.T. de l’Oise, site de Creil, 13, all´ee de la fa¨ıencerie, 60 107 Creil, France Abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realm of Ordinal Analysis
    The Realm of Ordinal Analysis Michael Rathjen Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Leeds Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom Denn die Pioniere der Mathematik hatten sich von gewissen Grundlagen brauchbare Vorstellungen gemacht, aus denen sich Schl¨usse,Rechnungsarten, Resultate ergaben, deren bem¨achtigten sich die Physiker, um neue Ergebnisse zu erhalten, und endlich kamen die Techniker, nahmen oft bloß die Resultate, setzten neue Rechnungen darauf und es entstanden Maschinen. Und pl¨otzlich, nachdem alles in sch¨onste Existenz gebracht war, kamen die Mathematiker - jene, die ganz innen herumgr¨ubeln, - darauf, daß etwas in den Grundlagen der ganzen Sache absolut nicht in Ordnung zu bringen sei; tats¨achlich, sie sahen zuunterst nach und fanden, daß das ganze Geb¨audein der Luft stehe. Aber die Maschinen liefen! Man muß daraufhin annehmen, daß unser Dasein bleicher Spuk ist; wir leben es, aber eigentlich nur auf Grund eines Irrtums, ohne den es nicht entstanden w¨are. ROBERT MUSIL: Der mathematische Mensch (1913) 1 Introduction A central theme running through all the main areas of Mathematical Logic is the classification of sets, functions or theories, by means of transfinite hierarchies whose ordinal levels measure their ‘rank’ or ‘complexity’ in some sense appropriate to the underlying context. In Proof Theory this is manifest in the assignment of ‘proof the- oretic ordinals’ to theories, gauging their ‘consistency strength’ and ‘computational power’. Ordinal-theoretic proof theory came into existence in 1936, springing forth from Gentzen’s head in the course of his consistency proof of arithmetic. To put it roughly, ordinal analyses attach ordinals in a given representation system to formal theories.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptive Set Theory and the Ergodic Theory of Countable Groups
    DESCRIPTIVE SET THEORY AND THE ERGODIC THEORY OF COUNTABLE GROUPS Thesis by Robin Daniel Tucker-Drob In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California 2013 (Defended April 17, 2013) ii c 2013 Robin Daniel Tucker-Drob All Rights Reserved iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor Alexander Kechris for his invaluable guidance and support, for his generous feedback, and for many (many!) discussions. In addition I would like to thank Miklos Abert,´ Lewis Bowen, Clinton Conley, Darren Creutz, Ilijas Farah, Adrian Ioana, David Kerr, Andrew Marks, Benjamin Miller, Jesse Peterson, Ernest Schimmerling, Miodrag Sokic, Simon Thomas, Asger Tornquist,¨ Todor Tsankov, Anush Tserunyan, and Benjy Weiss for many valuable conversations over the past few years. iv Abstract The primary focus of this thesis is on the interplay of descriptive set theory and the ergodic theory of group actions. This incorporates the study of turbulence and Borel re- ducibility on the one hand, and the theory of orbit equivalence and weak equivalence on the other. Chapter 2 is joint work with Clinton Conley and Alexander Kechris; we study measurable graph combinatorial invariants of group actions and employ the ultraproduct construction as a way of constructing various measure preserving actions with desirable properties. Chapter 3 is joint work with Lewis Bowen; we study the property MD of resid- ually finite groups, and we prove a conjecture of Kechris by showing that under general hypotheses property MD is inherited by a group from one of its co-amenable subgroups. Chapter 4 is a study of weak equivalence.
    [Show full text]
  • Descriptive Set Theory and Operator Algebras
    Descriptive Set Theory and Operator Algebras Edward Effros (UCLA), George Elliott (Toronto), Ilijas Farah (York), Andrew Toms (Purdue) June 18, 2012–June 22, 2012 1 Overview of the Field Descriptive set theory is the theory of definable sets and functions in Polish spaces. It’s roots lie in the Polish and Russian schools of mathematics from the early 20th century. A central theme is the study of regularity properties of well-behaved (say Borel, or at least analytic/co-analytic) sets in Polish spaces, such as measurability and selection. In the recent past, equivalence relations and their classification have become a central focus of the field, and this was one of the central topics of this workshop. One of the original co-organizers of the workshop, Greg Hjorth, died suddenly in January 2011. His work, and in particular the notion of a turbulent group action, played a key role in many of the discussions during the workshop. Functional analysis is of course a tremendously broad field. In large part, it is the study of Banach spaces and the linear operators which act upon them. A one paragraph summary of this field is simply impossible. Let us say instead that our proposal will be concerned mainly with the interaction between set theory, operator algebras, and Banach spaces, with perhaps an emphasis on the first two items. An operator algebra can be interpreted quite broadly ([4]), but is frequently taken to be an algebra of bounded linear operators on a Hilbert space closed under the formation of adjoints, and furthermore closed under either the norm topology (C∗-algebras) or the strong operator topology (W∗-algebras).
    [Show full text]
  • Determinacy and Large Cardinals
    Determinacy and Large Cardinals Itay Neeman∗ Abstract. The principle of determinacy has been crucial to the study of definable sets of real numbers. This paper surveys some of the uses of determinacy, concentrating specifically on the connection between determinacy and large cardinals, and takes this connection further, to the level of games of length ω1. Mathematics Subject Classification (2000). 03E55; 03E60; 03E45; 03E15. Keywords. Determinacy, iteration trees, large cardinals, long games, Woodin cardinals. 1. Determinacy Let ωω denote the set of infinite sequences of natural numbers. For A ⊂ ωω let Gω(A) denote the length ω game with payoff A. The format of Gω(A) is displayed in Diagram 1. Two players, denoted I and II, alternate playing natural numbers forming together a sequence x = hx(n) | n < ωi in ωω called a run of the game. The run is won by player I if x ∈ A, and otherwise the run is won by player II. I x(0) x(2) ...... II x(1) x(3) ...... Diagram 1. The game Gω(A). A game is determined if one of the players has a winning strategy. The set A is ω determined if Gω(A) is determined. For Γ ⊂ P(ω ), det(Γ) denotes the statement that all sets in Γ are determined. Using the axiom of choice, or more specifically using a wellordering of the reals, it is easy to construct a non-determined set A. det(P(ωω)) is therefore false. On the other hand it has become clear through research over the years that det(Γ) is true if all the sets in Γ are definable by some concrete means.
    [Show full text]
  • Weak*-Polish Banach Spaces HASKELL ROSENTHAL*
    JOURNAL OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS 76, 267-316 (1988) Weak*-Polish Banach Spaces HASKELL ROSENTHAL* Department of Mathemattcs, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712 Communicated by the Editors Received February 27, 1986 A Banach space X which is a subspace of the dual of a Banach space Y is said to be weak*-Polish proviced X is separable and the closed unit bail of X is Polish in the weak*-topology. X is said to be Polish provided it is weak*-Polish when regar- ded as a subspace of ,I’**. A variety of structural results arc obtained for Banach spaces with the Point of Continuity Property (PCP), using the unifying concept of weak*-Polish Banach spaces. It is proved that every weak*-Polish Banach space contains an (infinite-dimensional) weak*-closed subspace. This yields the result of Edgar-Wheeler that every Polish Banach space has a reflexive subspace. It also yields the result of Ghoussoub-Maurey that every Banach space with the PCP has a subspace isomorphic to a separable dual, in virtue of the following known result linking the PCP and weak*-Polish Banach spaces: A separable Banach space has the PCP if (Edgar-Wheeler) and only if (GhoussoubMaurey) it is isometric to a weak*-Polish subspace of the dual of some separable Banach space. (For com- pleteness, a proof of this result is also given.) It is proved that if X and Y are Banach spaces with Xc Y*, then X is weak*-Polish if and only if X has a weak*- continuous boundedly complete skipped-blocking decomposition.
    [Show full text]