7
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $\phi(x)$ is a $\Delta^{1}_{2}$-formula (without parameters) and let $A:=\{x\subseteq\omega:\phi(x)\}$. It is clear that, e.g. if there are Cohen-generics over $L$, then $A$ cannot be the set of constructible reals, roughly because $\Delta^{1}_{2}$ cannot distinguish between sufficiently high Cohen-generics in $L$ and Cohen-generics over $L$. I wonder whether this can be strengthenend in the following way:

Given appropriate largeness assumptions (existence of generic filters, large cardinals...), at least one of $A$ and $\mathfrak{P}(\omega)\setminus A$ contains real numbers of all degrees of constructibility. In other words, can $\Delta^{1}_{2}$ "separate" degrees of constructibility in a nontrivial way?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Some weak positive comments: Under appropriate large cardinal assumptions, $\mathcal{P}(\omega)^L$ is countable and hence $L$-Cohen generics exist. More interestingly, suppose there are appropriate large cardinals and both $A$ and $A^c$ are each uncountable. Then since $\Delta^1_2$ sets have the perfect set property (because of the large cardinal assumption), let $P,Q$ be perfect subsets of $A,A^c$ respectively. Then we conclude that both $A$ and $A^c$ have reals of all sufficiently high constructibility degrees - namely, above reals coding $P$ and $Q$ respectively. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 16, 2018 at 11:55
  • $\begingroup$ I had posted an answer earlier, but I had forgotten about the difference between $\Delta^1_2$ and ``absolutely $\Delta^1_2$." Namely: it could be that $A \subseteq 2^\omega$ is $\Delta^1_2$, but in forcing extensions, the $\Sigma^1_2$ and $\Pi^1_2$-definitions of $A$ differ... $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2018 at 21:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DouglasUlrich In $L$, I think there is a $\Delta_2^1$ set of reals so that it and its complement does not have a perfect subset. In $L$, the canonical wellordering is $\Sigma_1$. By diagonalizing against perfect trees and putting all reals into $A$ or $A$ complement, I think you make such a set. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2018 at 21:15
  • $\begingroup$ @William yes, sorry. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2018 at 21:16

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

Expanding on Douglas Ulrich's answer:

Note that this question is only meaningful when there are nonconstructible reals since otherwise there is only one constructibility degree.

If there is a nonconstructible real and $A$ is $\Delta_2^1$ set, then either $A$ or $\mathbb{R} \setminus A$ is a $\Sigma_2^1$ set of reals with a nonconstructible element. Without loss of generality, suppose $A$ has the nonconstructible real. By the Mansfield-Solovay theorem (using the $\omega_1$-Suslin representation via the Shoenfield Tree $S$ for $A$ which belongs to $L$), there is a constructible tree $T$ so that $[T] \subseteq A$.

Every constructible tree is an $L$-pointed tree. So $[T]$ has every $L$-degree.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is also simpler than my argument. And it might be better to say "patching" rather than expanding :) $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 19, 2018 at 21:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.