Professional Documents
Culture Documents
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
On the number of non-isomorphic subgraphs
S. Shelah
Institute of Mathematics
Hebrew University, Jerusalem
L. Soukup
Mathematical Institute of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
October 6, 2003
Abstract
Let K be the family of graphs on
1
without cliques or independent
subsets of size
1
. We prove that
(a) it is consistent with CH that every G K has 2
1
many pairwise
non-isomorphic subgraphs,
(b) the following proposition holds in L: () there is a G K such
that for each partition (A, B) of
1
either G
= G[A] or G
=
G[B],
(c) the failure of () is consistent with ZFC.
1 Introduction
We assume only basic knowledge of set theory simple combinatorics for
section 2, believing in L [=
+
dened below for section 3, and nite support
iterated forcing for section 4.
The rst author was supported by the United States Israel Binational Science Foun-
dation, Publication 370
The second author was supported by the Hungarian National Foundation for Scientic
Research grant no. l805
1
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 2
Answering a question of R. Jamison, H. A. Kierstead and P. J. Nyikos
[5] proved that if an n-uniform hypergraph G = V, E) is isomorphic to each
of its induced subgraphs of cardinality [V [, then G must be either empty or
complete. They raised several new problems. Some of them will be investi-
gated in this paper. To present them we need to introduce some notions.
An innite graph G = V, E) is called non-trivial i G contains no clique
or independent subset of size [V [. Denote the class of all non-trivial graphs on
1
by /. Let I(G) be the set of all isomorphism classes of induced subgraphs
of G = V, E) with size [V [.
H. A. Kierstead and P. J. Nyikos proved that [I(G)[ for each G /
and asked whether [I(G)[ 2
or [I(G)[ 2
1
hold or not. In [3] it was
shown that (i) [I(G)[ 2
1
for each G /. Given any G / we
will investigate its partition tree. Applying the weak principle of Devlin
and Shelah [2] we show that if this partition tree is a special Aronszajn tree,
then [I(G)[ >
1
. This result completes the investigation of problem 2 of [5]
for
1
.
Consider a graph G = V, E) . We say that G is almost smooth if it
is isomorphic to G[W] whenever W V with [V W[ < [V [. The graph
G is called quasi smooth i it is isomorphic either to G[W] or to G[V W]
whenever W V . H. A. Kierstead and P. J. Nyikos asked (problem 3)
whether an almost smooth, non-trivial graph can exist. In [3] various models
of ZFC was constructed which contain such graphs on
1
. It was also shown
that the existence of a non-trivial, quasi smooth graph on
1
is consistent
with ZFC. But in that model CH failed. In section 3 we prove that
+
, and
so V=L, too, implies the existence of such a graph.
In section 4 we construct a model of ZFC in which there is no quasi-
smooth G /. Our main idea is that given a G / we try to construct a
partition (A
0
, A
1
) of
1
which is so bad that not only G ,
= G[A
i
] in the ground
model but certain simple generic extensions can not add such isomorphisms
to the ground model. We divide the class / into three subclasses and develop
dierent methods to carry out our plan.
The question whether the existence of an almost-smooth G / can be
proved in ZFC is still open.
We use the standard set-theoretical notation throughout, cf [4]. Given a
graph G = V, E) we write V (G) = V and E(G) = E. If H V (G) we
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 3
dene G[H] to be H, E(G) [H]
2
). Given x V take G(x) = y V :
x, y E. If G and H are graphs we write G
= H to mean that G and H
are isomorphic. If f : V (G) V (H) is a function we denote by f : G
= H
the fact that f is an isomorphism between G and H.
Given a set X let Bij
p
(X) be the set of all bijections between subsets of
X. If G = V, E) is a graph take
Iso
p
(G) = f Bij
p
(V ) : f : G[dom(f)]
= G[ran(f)] .
We denote by Fin(X, Y ) the set of all functions mapping a nite subset of
X to Y .
Given a poset P and p, q P we write p|
P
q to mean that p and q are
compatible in P.
The axiom
+
claims that there is a sequence S
: <
1
) of contable
sets such that for each X
1
we have a closed unbounded C
1
satisfying
X S
and C S
for each C.
We denote by TC(x) the transitive closure of a set x. If is a cardinal
take H
= H
, ).
Let us denote by T
1
the club lter on
1
.
2 I(G) can be always large
Theorem 2.1 Asume that GCH holds and every Aronszajn-tree is special.
Then [I(G)[ = 2
1
for each G /.
Remark: S.Shelah proved, [7, chapter V. 6,7], that the assumption of
theorem 2.1 is consistent with ZFC.
During the proof we will apply the following denitions and lemmas.
Lemma 2.2 Assume that G /, A [
1
]
1
and [G(x) A : x
1
[ =
1
.
Then [I(G)[ = 2
1
.
Proof: See [3, theorem 2.1 and lemma 2.13].
Denition 2.3 Consider a graph G =
1
, E).
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 4
1. For each
1
let us dene the ordinal
1
and the sequence
as follows: put
0
= 0 and if
and (
, E i
, E) .
If
= , then we put
= .
2. Given ,
1
write
G
i
for each
.
3. Take T
G
=
1
,
G
. T
G
is called the partition tree of G.
Lemma 2.4 If G =
1
, E) / with [I(G)[ < 2
1
, then T
G
is an Aronszajn
tree.
Proof: By the construction of T
G
, if ,
1
, < and G() =
G() , then
G
. So the levels of T
G
are countable by lemma 2.2. On
the other hand, T
G
does not contain
1
-branches, because the branches are
prehomogeneous subsets and G is non-trivial.
Denition 2.5 1. Let F : (2
)
<
1
2 and A
1
. We say that a
function g :
1
2 is an A-diamond for F i, for any h (2
1
,
A : F(h) = g() is a stationary subset of
1
.
2. A
1
is called a small subset of
1
i for some F : (2
)
<
1
2 no
function is an A-diamond for F.
3. = A
1
: A is a small subset of
1
.
In [2] the following was proved:
Theorem 2.6 If 2
< 2
1
, then is a countably complete, proper, normal
ideal on
1
.
After this preparation we are ready to prove theorem 2.1.
Proof: Assume that G =
1
, E) /.
[I(G)[ < 2
1
and a contradiction will be derived.
Since 2
1
=
2
, we can x a sequence G
: <
1
of graphs on
1
such that for each Y [
1
]
1
there is a <
1
with G[Y ]
= G
. Write
G
=
1
, E
).
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 5
Consider the Aronszajn-tree T
G
=
1
,
G
1
: S(
G
)
.
Now property () below holds:
() S (S A) + 1
A (, E i , / E).
Indeed, if for each A we had , E i , E, then
G
would hold by the construction of T
G
.
Let
1
, S, T S and f : G[(A ) T] G
be an
embedding. Dene F(, , T, f) 2 as follows:
F(, , T, f) = 1 i x G
( A )(x, f() E
i , E).
In case = , under suitable encoding, F can be viewed as a function
from (2
)
<
1
to 2.
Since S / , there is a g 2
1
such that for every
1
= 2
, T S
and f : G[A T]
= G
, the set
S
T
= S : g() = F(, , T , f)
is stationary. Take T = S : g() = 0. Choose an ordinal <
1
and a
function f with f : G[A T]
= G
i , E).
Thus g() = 0 i F(, , T , f) = 1, for each S, that is, S
T
= ,
which is a contradiction.
3 A quasi-smooth graph under
+
Theorem 3.1 If
+
holds, then there exists a non-trivial, quasi-smooth
graph on
1
.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 6
Proof: Given a set X, /P(X) and TBij
p
(X) take
Cl(/, T) =
B : B / and B
0
, B
1
B f T Y [X]
<
B
0
B
1
, f
B
0
, B
0
Y B .
We say that / is T-closed if / = Cl(/, T). Given /, TP(X), we say that
T is uncovered by / if [DA[ = for each A / and D T.
Lemma 3.2 Assume that TBij
p
(X) is a countable set, /
0
, /
1
P(X) are
countable, T-closed families. If TP(X) is a countable family which is
uncovered by /
0
/
1
, then there is a partition (B
0
, B
1
) of X such that T is
uncovered by Cl(/
i
B
i
, T) for i < 2.
Proof: We can assume that T is closed under composition. Fix an enumer-
ation D
n
, k
n
, F
n
, i
n
, A
n
) : n of T T
<
i, A) : i 2, A /
i
.
By induction on n, we will pick points x
n
X and will dene nite sets, B
0
n
and B
1
n
, such that B
0
n
B
1
n
= and B
i
n
B
i
n+1
.
Assume that we have done it for n 1. Write F
n
= f
0
, . . . , f
k1
). Take
B
n1
= B
0
n1
B
1
n1
and
B
n
= B
n1
j
B
n1
: j < k
.
Pick an arbitrary point x
n
D
n
(A
n
B
n
). Put
B
in
n
= B
in
n1
and
B
1in
n
= B
1in
n1
x
n
f
1
j
(x
n
) : j < k
.
Next choose a partition (B
0
, B
1
) of X with B
i
B
i
n
: n < for i < 2.
We claim that it works. Indeed, a typical element of Cl(/
i
B
i
, T) has
the form
C = A
j
B
i
: j < k
,
where A /, k < and f
0
, . . . , f
k1
T. So, if D T, then
DC x
n
: D
n
= D, A
n
= A, i
n
= i and F
n
= f
0
, . . . , f
k1
)
because x
n
/ A and f
1
j
(x
n
) B
1i
by the constuction.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 7
Consider a sequence F = f
0
, . . . , f
n1
). Given a family TBij
p
(X) we
say that F is an T-term provided f
i
= f or f
i
= f
1
for some f T, for
each i < n. We denote the function f
0
f
n1
by F as well. We will
assume that the empty term denotes the identity function on X. If l n
take
(l)
F = f
0
, . . . , f
l1
) and F
(l)
= f
l
, . . . , f
n1
). Let
Sub(F) =
f
i
0
, . . . , f
i
l1
: l n, i
0
< . . . < i
l1
< n
.
Given f T and x, y X with x / dom(f) and y / ran(f) let F
f,x,y
be
the term that we obtain replacing each occurrence of f and of f
1
in F with
f x, y) and with f
1
y, x), respectively.
Lemma 3.3 Assume that TBij
p
(X), /P(X) is T-closed, F
0
, . . . , F
n1
are T-terms, z
0
, . . . , z
n1
X, A
0
, . . . , A
n1
/ such that for each i < n
() z
i
/
A
i
: F Sub(F
i
) .
If f T, x Xdom(f), Y [Xran(f)]
A
i
: F Sub(F
f,x,y
i
)
Y
G,F
(l)
A
: l n, G Sub(
(l)
F
f,x,y
), G ,= F
f,x,y
.
Assume that [Y
F,A
[ < and a contradiction will be derived.
First let us remark that either f
k1
= f or f
k1
= f
1
by ().
Case 1:f
k1
= f
1
.
Then Y
F,A
Y A by (), so we are done.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 8
Case 2:f
k1
= f.
In this case x A and for all but nitely many y Y we have z =
F
f,x,y
(x). Then for each y, y
Y take
l(y, y
) = max
l n : i < l F
f,x,y
(i)
(x) = F
f,x,y
(i)
(x)
.
By Ramseys theorem, we can assume that l(y, y
) = l whenever y, y
Y .
Clearly l < n. Then F
f,x,y
(l)
(x) ,= F
f,x,y
(l)
(x) but F
f,x,y
(l1)
(x) = F
f,x,y
(l1)
(x), so
f
l
= f
1
and F
f,x,y
(l1)
(x) = x for each y Y . Thus z =
(l1)
F
f,x,y
(x) for each
y Y , which contradicts () because x A.
The lemma is proved.
We are ready to construct our desired graph.
First x a sequence M
: <
1
) of countable, elementary submodels of
some H
with M
: < ) M
: <
1
) M
0
for the uncountable sub-
sets of
1
, that is , <
1
: X = S
/ NS(
1
) whenever X [
1
]
1
.
We can also assume that S
= , E
) with G
= G
[] for < ,
2. countable sets T
Iso
p
(G
),
satisfying the induction hypotheses (I)(II) below:
(I) S
: is uncovered by I
where
I
= Cl(G() : ,
)
and
J
= Cl(G() : ,
).
To formulate (II) we need the following denition.
Denition 3.4 Assume that = + 1 and Y . We say that Y is large
if n , f
i
, x
i
) : i < n), h
if
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 9
1. i < n
i
< f
i
T
i
,
2. i < n
i
x
i
< ,
3. i < n ran(f
i
)Y ,
4. i ,= j < n ran(f
i
) ran(f
j
) =
5. h Fin(Y , 2) and dom(h)
ran(f
i
) : i < n = ,
then
y Y [, ) such that
6. i < n x dom(f
i
) (y, f
i
(x) E
i x
i
, x E
),
7. z dom(h) y, z E
i h(z) = 1.
Take
(II) If = + 1, then is large.
The construction will be carried out in such a way that G
: ) M
and T
: < ) M
.
To start with take G
0
= , ) and T = . Assume that the construc-
tion is done for < .
Case 1: is limit.
We must take G
= G
, T
1
Iso
p
(G
)
and will take T
= T
0
T
1
.
Let
T
0
= f Iso
p
(G
) M
:
n
: n < ) sup
n
: n < = ,
f
n
T
n
and f
n
: G
n
= G
n
[ran(f)] for each n .
Take T
=
<
T
T
0
, I
=
<
I
and J
=
<
J
. Clearly T
with T
M
+1
, so M
+1
[= [T
[ = . Obviously both I
and J
are
T
-closed and o = S
: is uncovered by them.
From now on we work in M
+1
to construct T
1
. For W write
L
W
= < : W ( +) is large.
Take
J
= W, f) (P() /
) (
<
T
) : L
W
is conal in
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 10
and f : G
= G
f
[W
f
] for some
f
<
.
We want to nd functions g
W,f
f for W, f) J
such that
(A) g
W,f
: G
= G
[W]
(B) taking T
1
g
W,f
: W, f) J
, g Iso
p
(G
, G
, G
[W])
is conal in .
(ii) for each y Wran(f) the set
x W : g x, y) Iso
p
(G
, G
[W])
is conal in .
Proof: (i): Dene the function h : ran(g)ran(f) 2 with h(g(z)) = 1
i z, x E
. Choose L
W
with ran(h) and
f
. Since
W ( +) is large, we have a y W [, +) such that
1. y, f(z) E
i x, z E
, G
[W]).
(ii) The same proof works using that + is large for each < .
By induction on n, we will pick points z
n
and will construct
families of partial automorphisms,
g
W,f
n
: W, f) J
such that g
W,f
=
g
W,f
n
: n <
will work.
During the inductive construction we will speak about T
-terms and
about functions which are represented by them in the n
th
step.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 11
If F = h
0
, . . . h
k1
) is an T
g
W,f
n
if h
i
= g
W,f
,
(g
W,f
n
)
1
if h
i
= (g
W,f
)
1
,
h
i
otherwise.
First x an enumeration W
n
, f
n
) , u
n
, i
n
) : 1 n < of J
2 and
an enumeration F
n,i
: i < l
n
) , j
n
, A
n,i
: i < l
n
) , D
n
) n < ) of the quadru-
ples F
0
, . . . , F
k1
) , j, A
0
, . . . , A
k1
) , D) where k < , F
0
, . . . , F
k1
are T
-
terms, j 2, D o and either j = 0 and A
0
, . . . , A
k1
I
or j = 1 and
A
0
, . . . , A
k1
J
.
During the inductive construction conditions (i)(v) below will be satis-
ed:
(i) g
W,f
0
= f
(ii) g
W,f
n
Iso
p
(G
, G
[W])
(iii) g
W,f
n
g
W,f
n1
, [g
W,f
n
f[ <
(iv) z
k
/
[n]
A
k,i
: F Sub(F
k,i
)
y W : g
W,f
n1
u
n
, y) Iso
p
(G
, G
[W])
is unbounded in .
Since the members of I
[n]
A
n,i
: F Sub(F
n,i
), i < l
n
.
The inductive construction is done.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 12
Take g
W,f
=
g
W,f
n
: n <
. By (v),
g
W,f
n
: G
= G
[W].
By (iv), we have
z
k
D
k
k,i
A
k,i
: i < l
k
: is uncovered by I
.
Case 2: = + 1.
To start with we x an enumeration
f
k
i
, x
k
i
) : i < n
k
), h
k
: k
of
pairs f
i
, x
i
) : i < n) , h) satisfying 3.4.15.
If k take
B
0
k
= h
1
k
0
f
k
i
() : i < n
k
, dom(f
k
i
) and
, x
k
i
/ E
and
B
1
k
= h
1
k
1
f
k
i
() : i < n
k
, dom(f
k
i
) and
, x
k
i
.
Applying lemma 3.2 -many times we can nd partitions (C
0
k
, C
k
1
), k < ,
of such that taking
I
+
= Cl((I
C
1
k
: k
)
and
J
+
= Cl((I
C
0
k
: k
)
the set S
: is uncovered by I
+
J
+
.
We can assume that B
i
k
C
i
k
for i < 2 and k < because B
0
k
J
and
B
1
k
I
. Take
E
= E
, +n : < , n and B
1
n
and
T
= .
By the construction of G
= , E
X Y : X I
+
, Y []
<
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 13
and
J
X Y : X J
+
, Y []
<
.
so S
: < is uncovered by I
. Finally S
is conal in but
the elements of I
: <
1
and G =
1
, E).
By (I), G is non-trivial. Finally, we must prove that G is quasy smooth.
Consider a set Y
1
. The following lemma is almost trivial.
Lemma 3.6 For each <
1
either Y ( +) or ( +)Y is large.
Proof: Assume on the contrary that there are pairs f
i
, x
i
) : i < n) , h)
and f
i
, x
i
) : n i < n +k) , h
) shows that +
is not large.
So we can assume that the set
L = <
1
: Y ( +) is large
is uncountable and to complete the proof of theorem 3.1 it is enough to show
that in this case G
= G[Y ]. By
+
, we can nd a club subset CL
such
that Y M
, C M
: <
1
. By induction on <
1
, we will construct
functions f
such that
(a) f
: G
= G
[Y ], f
,
(b) f
: < ) M
sup{+1:<}
.
Take f
0
= . If = + 1, then let f
= g
Y ,f
. If is limit, then
put f
= f
: <
1
. Then f : G
= G[Y ], so the theorem is proved.
4 A model without quasi-smooth graphs
Given an Aronszajn-tree T =
1
, ) dene the poset Q
T
as follows: the
underlying set of Q
T
consists of all functions f mapping a nite subset of
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 14
1
to such that f
1
n is antichain in T for each n . The ordering on
Q
T
is as expected: f
Q
T
g i f g. For <
1
denote by T
the set of
elements of T with height . Take T
<
=
<
T
. If x T
G
(t) = x V A : [tp
G
(x, A)t[ < . For x V and A V put
twin
G
(x, A) = rl
G
(tp
G
(x, A)).
For A V dene the equivalence relation
G,A
on V A as follows:
x
G,A
y i [tp
G
(x, A)tp
G
(y, A))[ < .
For x V A denote by [x]
G,A
the equivalence class of x in
G,A
. Clearly
[x]
G,A
= rl
G
(tp
G
(x, A)). Write G/
G,A
for the family of equivalence classes
of
G,A
.
We divide / into three subclasses, /
0
, /
1
and /
2
, and investigate them
separately to show that V
P
2
[= (G /
i
) G is not quasi-smooth for i < 3.
Take
/
0
= G / : A [
1
]
[G/
G,A
[ =
1
,
/
1
= G / : A [
1
]
x [
1
[x]
G,A
[ <
1
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 15
and
/
2
= / (/
0
/
1
).
4.1 G K
0
First we recall a denition of [1].
Denition 4.2 A poset P is stable if
B [P]
[P]
p P p
p p
b B (p
|
P
b i p
|
P
b).
We will say that p
and p
2
is stable.
Proof: First let us remark that it is enough to prove that both ( and Q
T
are
stable for any Aronszajn-tree for in [1] it was proved that any nite support
iteration of stable, c.c.c. posets is stable.
It is clear that ( is stable. Assume that T is an Aronszajn tree and
B [Q
T
]
= p Q
T
: dom(p) T
<+
. It is not hard to see that B
shows
the stability of P for B.
For G / take G /
0
i there is an A [
1
]
0
i there are disjoint sets A
0
, A
1
[
1
]
such that
(1) x
G,A
0
y i x
G,A
1
y for each x, y
1
A
0
A
1
,
(2) the set x : [[x]
G,A
0
[ is uncountable.
Lemma 4.4 Assume CH. If G /
0
, then there is a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
so that for each stable c.c.c. poset P we have
V
P
[= G is not isomorphic to G[V
i
] for i 2.
Proof: Pick A
0
, A
1
[
1
]
witnessing G /
0
. Write A = A
0
A
1
. Take
E = E(G).
Let be a large enough regular cardinal and x an increasing sequence
N
: <
1
) of countable, elementary submodels of H
such that
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 16
(i) G, A, A
0
, A
1
N
0
,
(ii) N
: < ) N
for <
1
.
For x
1
A take
rank(x) = min : x N
.
Fix a partition (S
0
, S
1
) of
1
with [S
0
[ = [S
1
[ =
1
. Take
V
i
= A
i
rank
1
S
i
for i 2.
We show that the partition (V
0
, V
1
) works.
Assume on the contrary that P is a stable c.c.c. poset,
f is a P-name of
a function, p
0
P and
p
0
f : G
= G[V
0
].
Without loss of generality we can assume that p
0
= 1
P
. Now for each
c A
0
choose a maximal antichain J
c
P and a function h
c
: J
c
V such
that q
f
1
( c) =
h
c
(r) for each q J
c
.
Take B =
J
c
: c A
0
and pick a countable B
P showing the
stability of P for B.
For b P dene the partial function dt
b
:
1
2
A
0
as follows. Let
x
1
. If there is a function t 2
A
0
so that
(a) t(c) = 1 for each q I
c
if q and b are compatible conditions, then
x, h
c
(q) E,
(b) t(c) = 0 for each q I
c
if q and b are compatible conditions, then
x, h
c
(q) / E,
then take dt
b
(x) = t. Otherwise x / domdt
b
.
Sublemma 4.4.1 If p
f(x) = y, then there are p
p and b B
such
that b and p
, we can nd a p
p and a b B
so that p
and b
are twins for B. Let c A
0
. For each q J
c
, if q and p
are compatible in P,
then y, c E i x, h
c
(q) E , because, taking r as a common extension
of q and p
, we have r
f( x) = y and
f(
h
q
(c)) = c. So y, c E i for
each q I
c
if q and p
and b are
twins for
J
c
: c A
0
, so dt
b
(x) = dt
p
(x) = tp
G
(y, A
0
).
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 17
Sublemma 4.4.2 There is a b B
such that
() [t randt
b
: [rl
G
(t)[ [ =
1
.
Proof: Let ( be a P-generic lter over V . Put
T = tp
G
(y, A
0
) : y V
0
A
0
, [[y]
G,A
0
[ .
Then [T[ =
1
, so we can write T = t
: <
1
. Fix sequences
p
: <
1
) (, x
: <
1
)
1
and y
: <
1
)
1
such that
p
f(x
) = y
and tp
G
(y
, A
0
) = t
. By sublemma 4.4.1,
bB
ran dt
b
T.
But B
is countable, so we can nd a b B
satisfying () above.
Fix b B
), B, B
, J
c
, h
c
: c A
0
)) .
By CH, there is a <
1
with ^ N
. Pick S
1
. Since G, ^, b N
,
it follows that dt
b
N
<
N
)
with [rl
G
(t)[ . Then
() rl
G
(t) N
<
N
.
Pick x
1
with dt
b
(x) = t. Find p ( and y V
0
such that p b
and p
f(x) = y. By sublemma 4.4.1, there are p
p and b
such that p
and b
. By the denition of dt
b
, it follows that
h
c
(q), x E. Since p
and b
in P. But p
p b, so q
0
, then
V
C
[= there is a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
so that
for each stable c.c.c. poset P we have:
V
CP
[= G is not isomorphic to G[V
i
] for i 2.
Proof: . Fix a set A [
1
]
witnessing G /
0
and a bijection f : A
in V. Let r : 2 be the characteristic function of a Cohen real from V
C
.
Take A
i
= (f r)
1
i for i < 2. Then (A
0
, A
1
) is a partition of A. Using a
trivial density argument we can see that x ,
G,A
y implies x ,
G,A
i
y for i < 2
and for x, y
1
A. Thus V
C
[= A
0
and A
1
witness G /
0
. Applying
lemma 4.4 in V
C
we get the desired partition of
1
.
Lemma 4.6 In V
P
2
, if G /
0
is quasi-smooth, then G /
0
.
Proof: Choose a set A [
1
]
witnessing G /
0
and a bijection f : A .
Pick <
2
, is even, with A, f, G V
P
. From now on we work in V
P
.
Let [x
]
G,A
: <
1
be an enumeration of the equivalence classes of
G,A
.
Fix a partition (I
0
, I
1
) of
1
into uncountable pieces. Let r : 2 be the
characteristic function of a Cohen real from V
PC
. Take A
i
= (f r)
1
i
for i < 2. Then (A
0
, A
1
) is a partition of A. Using a trivial density argument
we can see that x ,
G,A
y implies x ,
G,A
i
y for i < 2 and for x, y
1
A.
For i 2 put
B
i
= A
i
x
: I
i
[x
]
G,A
x
: I
1i
.
Clearly (B
0
, B
1
) is a partition of
1
and
B
i
[x
]
G,A
i
= B
i
[x
]
G,A
= x
.
So G[B
i
] /
. But G is quasi-smooth, so G
= G[B
i
] for some i 2 in V
P
2
.
Thus G /
0
is proved.
4.2 G K
1
We say that a poset P has property Pr i for each sequence p
: <
1
) P
there exist disjoint sets U
0
, U
1
[
1
]
1
such that whenever U
0
and U
1
we have p
|
P
p
.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 19
Lemma 4.7 ( has property Pr.
Indeed, ( has property K.
Lemma 4.8 If T is an Aronszajn-tree, then Q
T
has property Pr.
Proof: Let p
: <
1
) P be given. We can assume that there are a
stationary set S
1
, p
Q
T
,
<
1
, n and z
i
: i < n T such
that for each S
(a) x dom(p
) with height
T
(x) ,
(b) p
T
<
= p
,
(c) [dom(p
) T
[ = n,
(d) writing dom(p
) T
= x
0
, . . . , x
n1
, x
0
<
On
. . . <
On
x
n1
, the
sequence
(x
0
), . . . , p
(x
n1
)
is independent from ,
(e)
, . . . , x
n1
= z
i
for i < n.
For each <
1
and y = y
0
, . . . , y
n1
) (T
)
n
take
S
y
= S : x
i
= y
i
for each i < n.
Let
C
= <
1
: < y (T
)
n
([S
y
[ S
y
).
Now p
: S C
are
1
members of P, so for some < S C
the conditions p
and p
(x
l
) = p
(x
l
), x
l
and x
l
are incomparable in T for l < n. So for some < , x
l
,= x
l
whenever
l < n. On the other hand, for l ,= m < n we have x
l
,= x
m
because
x
= z
l
,= z
m
= x
. Take y
a
l
= x
l
and y
b
l
= x
l
for l < n and
write a =
y
a
0
, . . . , y
a
n1
,
b =
y
b
0
, . . . , y
b
n1
. The elements y
a
i
, y
b
i
: i < n
are pairwise dierent, so for each
S
a
and
S
b
the conditions p
and
p
.
A poset P is called well-met if any two compatible elements p
0
and p
1
of
P have a greatest lower bound denoted by p
0
p
1
.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 20
Lemma 4.9 Assume that the poset P has property Pr and V
P
[= the poset
Q has property Pr. Let p
, q
) : <
1
P Q. Then there are
disjoint sets U
0
, U
1
[
1
]
1
such that for each U
0
and U
1
the
conditions p
, q
) and p
, q
and p
have
a common extension p
,
in P with p
,
|
Q
q
. If P is well-met, then
we can nd conditions p
: U
0
U
1
in P with p
such that
p
|
Q
q
for each U
0
and U
1
.
Proof: Let
U be a P-name for the set U = : p
(
P
, where (
P
is the P-
generic lter. Since P satises c.c.c., there is a p
P with p
[
U[ =
1
.
Since V
P
[=Q has property Pr, there is a condition p p
V
i
=
i
: <
1
[U]
1
, for i 2, and q
0
and q
1
p and
ordinals
0
,
1
, with p
for i < 2.
Now consider the sequence A = p
: <
1
. Since P has property
Pr, there are disjoint, uncountable sets C
0
, C
1
A such that p
and p
are
compatible whenever C
0
and C
1
. Take U
i
=
i
: C
i
for
i 2. We can assume that U
0
U
1
= . Let C
0
and C
1
and let
p
be a common extension of p
and p
. Then p
,
1
U, that is, p
and p
are in (
P
, so p
and p
. So
p
V
0
and
1
V
1
, thus p
and q
are compatible in Q, so
, q
|
PQ
, q
.
Suppose that P is well-met. Take p
= p
and p
= p
.
It works because we can use p
as p
: , S
: <
1
) R
. Without loss
of generality we can assume that supp(p
) : <
1
) forms a -system with
kernel d. Fix < with d . By the induction hypothesis, the poset
R
1
such that
whenever U
0
and U
1
we have p
|
R
p
. But p
|
R
p
implies p
|
R
p
because supp(p
) supp(p
) , so R
2
has property Pr.
Given G =
1
, E) /
1
and , ,
1
with take
D
G
(, ) = : , E i , / E.
Lemma 4.12 If G /
1
, then
()
1
G
()
1
,
1
G
() [D
G
(, )[ < .
Proof: Since G /
1
, we have an x
1
with [
1
[x]
[ <
1
. Choose
G
()
1
with
1
[x]
G
(). It works because , >
G
() implies
, [x]
.
The bipartite graph
1
2, , 0) , , 1) : < <
1
) will be de-
noted by [
1
;
1
].
Lemma 4.13 If G /
1
, then neither G nor its complement may have a
not necessarily spanned subgraph isomorphic to [
1
;
1
].
Proof: Let G =
1
, E). Write E() =
1
: , E. Assume
on the contrary that A, B [
1
]
1
are disjoint sets such that , E
whenever A and B with < . Without loss of generality we can
assume that (A +1) () = for each A. Write A =
: <
1
.
Then for
1
the set F() = (A
) E(
+1
) is nite because
+1
>
(
) and (A
and
take W =
+1
: T. Then G[W] is an uncountable complete subgraph
of G. Contradiction.
Lemma 4.14 If G /
1
and V
C
[=Q has property Pr, then
V
CQ
[= G ,
= G[f
1
i] for i < 2,
where f :
1
2 is the (-generic function over V .
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 22
Proof: Assume on the contrary that
p, q)
h : G
= G[f
1
0].
To simplify our notations, we will write E for E(G), D
(, ) for D
G
(, )
and () for
G
().
Let C
0
= <
1
: < implies () < . Clearly C
0
is club. Take
C
1
= <
1
: p, q)
= f
1
0
. Since ( Q satises c.c.c, the
set C
1
is club. Put C
2
= C
0
C
1
.
Now for each <
1
let
= min(C
2
+ 1) and choose a condition
p
, q
such that
p
, q
h(
) =
.
Since
: S
0
S
1
) ( with p
such that p
|
Q
q
for each S
0
and S
1
.
We can assume that the sets dom(p
) : S
0
and dom(p
) : S
1
= S
0
: ,
E and Y
1
= S
1
: ,
/ E for
<
1
. Write Y
i
= <
1
: [Y
i
[ =
1
and Z
i
=
1
Y
i
for i < 2.
By 4.13, the sets Z
i
are countable. Pick C
2
with Dd
0
d
1
Z
0
Z
1
. Let
= min(C
2
+1) and
= min(C
2
+1) . Since d
0
d
1
and
[Y
0
[ = [Y
1
[ =
1
, we can choose
i
Y
i
with dom(p
i
) [,
) = for
i = 0, 1. The set W = D
0
,
1
) [,
i
i
>
(
0
p
q is a common
extension of q
0
and q
1
in Q and take
r =
0
p
1
, 1) : W, q
.
Since W (dom(p
0
) dom(p
1
)) = , r is a condition.
Pick a condition r
h(
) =
. Now [,
) because ,
C
1
. Since
r
h(
i
) =
i
,
h(
) = and
h is an isomorphism,
so
0
, E and
1
, / E imply that
0
, E and
1
, / E.
But D
i
(
i
,
i
) = D and D so
0
, E and
1
, / E, that is,
W. But r
ran(
h) = f
1
0 and f
1
0
W = , contradiction.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 23
4.3 G K
2
Given a non-trivial graph G = V, E) with V [
1
]
1
dene
(G) =
1
: V and [twin
G
(, V )[ .
The following lemma obviously holds.
Lemma 4.15 If G
0
and G
1
are graphs on uncountable subsets of
1
, G
0
=
G
1
, then (G
0
) = (G
1
) mod NS
1
.
Lemma 4.16 Given G / /
0
and S
1
there is a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
such that (G[V
0
]) S mod NS
1
and (G[V
1
])
1
S mod NS
1
.
Proof: Let be a large enough regular cardinal and x an increasing,
continuous sequence N
: <
1
) of countable, elementary submodels of
H
= H
, ) such that G, S N
0
and N
: ) N
+1
for <
1
.
Write
= N
1
and C =
: <
1
. Take V
0
=
S
(
+1
) and
V
1
=
1
V
0
=
1
\S
(
+1
).
It is enough to prove that (G[V
0
]) S mod NS
1
. Assume that
(G[V
0
]),
= ,
, V
0
and [twin
G[V
0
]
(,
V
0
)[ = . Since G, ,
V
0
N
+1
and [G/
G,V
0
[ , we have tp
GG[V
0
]
(,
V
0
) N
+1
and so twin
G[V
0
]
(,
) N
+1
as well. Thus
+1
. Hence V
0
implies
n
= S which was to be proved.
Lemma 4.17 If G / /
0
and (G) ,= mod NS
1
, then G is not quasi-
smooth.
Proof: Assume that S = (G) is stationary and let (S
0
, S
1
) be a partition of
S into stationary subsets. By lemma 4.16, there is a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
with (G([V
i
]) S S
i
. Then G[V
i
] and G can not be isomorphic by lemma
4.15.
Let us remark that G /
2
i G / /
0
and there is an A [
1
]
and
x
1
A such that [[x]
G,A
[ = [
1
[x]
G,A
[ =
1
.
Given G /
2
we will write G /
2
i there are two disjoint, countable
subsets of
1
, A
0
and A
1
, and there is an x
1
, such that [[x]
G,A
0
[ =
[
1
[x]
G,A
0
[ =
1
and [x]
G,A
0
A
1
= [x]
G,A
1
A
0
.
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 24
Lemma 4.18 If G /
2
, then G (/
2
)
V
C
.
Proof: Assume that A [
1
]
and x
1
witness G /
2
in the ground
model. Fix a bijection f : A in V. Let r : 2 be the characteristic
function of a Cohen real from V
C
. Take A
i
= (f r)
1
i. By a simple
density argument, we can see that [x]
G,A
0
= [x]
G,A
= [x]
G,A
1
. Thus A
0
, A
1
and x show that g /
2
.
Lemma 4.19 Assume that every Aronszajn tree is special. If G /
2
, then
there is a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
such that (G[V
i
]) is stationary for i < 2.
Proof: Choose A
0
, A
1
and x witnessing G /
2
. Let A = A
0
A
1
. Take
C
0
= [x]
G,A
0
A, C
1
= (
1
[x]
G,A
0
) A and consider the partition trees T
i
of
G[C
i
] for i 2 (see denition 2.3). These trees are Aronszajn-trees because
G is non-trivial. Fix functions h
i
: C
i
specializing T
i
. We can nd
natural numbers n
0
and n
1
such that the sets S
i
= : h
1
i
n
i
(T
i
)
,=
are stationary, that is, h
1
i
n
i
meets stationary many level of T
i
. Take
B
i
= h
1
i
n
i
and Y
i
= c C
i
: b B
i
c _
T
i
b.
Pick any S
i
. Let b B
i
(T
i
)
. If c Y
i
(T
i
)
<
, c ,= b, then c ,= b
by the construction of Y
i
. So tp
G
G[Y
i
]
(c, (T
i
)
<
) = tp
G
G[Y
i
]
(c, (T
i
)
<
) ,=
tp
GG[Y
i
]
(b, (T
i
)
<
) by the denition of the partition tree. This means that
twin
G[Y
i
]
(b, (T
i
)
<
) = b. Thus (G[Y
i
]) provided (T
i
)
<
and b
. But these requirements exclude only a non-stationary subset of S
i
. So
(G[Y
i
]) S
i
mod NS
1
.
Let V
i
= Y
i
A
i
(C
1i
Y
1i
) for i 2 and consider the partition (V
0
, V
1
)
of
1
. If z V
i
(Y
i
A
i
), then tp
G
(z, A
i
) ,= tp
G
(b, A
i
) for any b B
i
because
C
0
[x]
G,A
i
and C
1
1
[x]
G,A
i
. So (G[V
i
]) S
i
mod NS
1
holds.
Now we are ready to conclude the proof of theorem 4.1. We will work in
V
P
2
. Assume that G /. We must show that G is not quasi-smooth.
Pick a <
2
with G (/)
V
P
and Q
0
)
P
2
would hold by lemma
4.6. So we can assume that G (/
0
)
P
. Since P
2
is a stable, c.c.c. poset,
so is P
2
/P
+1
. So, by lemma 4.5, there is a partition (V
O
, V
1
) of
1
in V
P
+1
such that V
P
2
[=G is not isomorphic to G[V
i
] for i < 2.
Assume that G (/
1
)
V
P
. Since P
2
has property Pr, so is P
2
/P
+1
.
Thus, by lemma 4.14, the partition (V
O
, V
1
) of
1
given by the Q
-generic
3
7
0
r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
4
-
0
8
-
3
0
October 6, 2003 25
Cohen reals in V
P
+1
has the property that V
P
2
[=G is not isomorphic to
G[V
i
] for i < 2.
Finally assume that G (/
2
)
V
P
. By lemma 4.18, we have G (/
2
)
V
P
+1
.
Since P
2
satises c.c.c, it follows that G (/
2
)
V
P
2
. So applying lemma 4.19
we can nd a partition (V
0
, V
1
) of
1
such that both (G[V
0
]) and (G[V
1
]) are
stationary. Thus, by lemma 4.17, neither G[V
0
] nor G[V
1
] are quasi-smooth.
So G itself can not be quasi-smooth.
References
[1] U. Abraham, S. Shelah, Forcing with stable posets, Journal of Sym-
bolic Logic 47 (1982) no 1, 3742
[2] K. J. Devlin, S. Shelah, A weak version of which follows from 2
< 2
1
,
Israel J. Math 28 (1978) no 23, 239247
[3] A. Hajnal, Zs. Nagy, L. Soukup, On the number of non-isomorphic sub-
graphs of certain graphs without large cliques and independent subsets, to
appear in A tribute to Paul Erd os , Oxford University Press
[4] T. Jech, Set Theory, Academic Press. New York, 1978
[5] H. A. Kierstead, P. J. Nyikos, Hypergraphs with Finitely many Isomor-
phism Subtypes, preprint.
[6] D. Macpherson, A. H. Mekler, S. Shelah, The number of Innite Sub-
structures, preprint
[7] S. Shelah, Proper Forcing, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heilderberg New York,
1982