Reflection principle: Difference between revisions

One of the most common reflection principles is the assertion that first-order properties of the universe of all sets are "reflected" down to a rank \(V_\alpha\) of the von Neumann hierarchy. Formally, for every formula \(\varphi\) and sequence of parameters \(x_0, x_1, \ldots, x_n\), there is some ordinal \(\alpha\) where \(x_0, x_1, \cdots, x_n \in V_\alpha\), and \(\varphi(x_0, x_1, \cdots, x_n)\) is true in \(V_\alpha\) iff it is really true. This is known as the Levy-Montague reflection principle.<ref>https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.06669</ref> Because of the use of "\(\varphi(x_0, x_1, \cdots, x_n)\) is true" for an arbitrary first-order formula \(\phi\), but Tarski's undefinability theorem this may not be stated as a single first-order formula. This may be appear to be a formalization of Cantor's notion of Cantor's [[Absolute infinity|Absolute]], however there are ranks below which this principle holds. Each instance of this schema is actually provable in \(\mathrm{ZF}\), rather than being a candidate for a [[Large cardinal|large cardinal axiom]] or other new powerful axiom for set theory.

 

 

An even more general form of the reflection principle is as follows. Say a cumulative hierarchy is a family of sets \(W_\alpha\) indexed by ordinals so that, for all \(\alpha\), we have \(W_\alpha \subseteq W_{\alpha+1} \subseteq \mathcal{P}(W_\alpha)\); and for all limit ordinals \(\lambda\), \(W_\lambda = \bigcup_{\alpha < \lambda} W_\alpha\). Let \(W = \bigcup_{\alpha \in \mathrm{Ord}} W_\alpha\). Then, for every formula \(\varphi\), there are arbitrarily large \(\alpha\) so that, for all \(x_0, x_1, \cdots, x_n \in W_\alpha\), \(\varphi(x_0, x_1, \cdots, x_n)\) is true in \(W_\alpha\) iff it is true in \(W\). (Citation needed? I have seen this before too somewhere)