Abstract:Abstract. This article is devoted to the interplay between forcing with fusion and combinatorial covering properties. We illustrate this interplay by proving that in the Laver model for the consistency of the Borel's conjecture, the product of any two metrizable spaces with the Hurewicz property has the Menger property.
“…However, this paper concentrates on set-theoretic and combinatorial aspects of the property of Menger and its variations. Theorem 1.1 is closely related to the main result of [13] asserting that in the Laver model the product of any two Hurewicz metrizable spaces has the Menger property. Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Theorem 1.1 is closely related to the main result of [13] asserting that in the Laver model the product of any two Hurewicz metrizable spaces has the Menger property. Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9]. Regarding the relation between Theorem 1.1 and the main result of [13], each of them implies a weak form of the other one via the following duality results: For a metrizable space X, C p (X) is M -separable (resp.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9]. Regarding the relation between Theorem 1.1 and the main result of [13], each of them implies a weak form of the other one via the following duality results: For a metrizable space X, C p (X) is M -separable (resp. H-separable) if and only if all finite powers of X are Menger (resp.…”
We prove that in the Laver model for the consistency of the Borel's conjecture, the product of any two H-separable spaces is M -separable.2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 03E35, 54D20. Secondary: 54C50, 03E05.
“…However, this paper concentrates on set-theoretic and combinatorial aspects of the property of Menger and its variations. Theorem 1.1 is closely related to the main result of [13] asserting that in the Laver model the product of any two Hurewicz metrizable spaces has the Menger property. Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Theorem 1.1 is closely related to the main result of [13] asserting that in the Laver model the product of any two Hurewicz metrizable spaces has the Menger property. Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9]. Regarding the relation between Theorem 1.1 and the main result of [13], each of them implies a weak form of the other one via the following duality results: For a metrizable space X, C p (X) is M -separable (resp.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Let us note that our proof in [13] is conceptually different, even though both proofs are based on the same main technical lemma of [9]. Regarding the relation between Theorem 1.1 and the main result of [13], each of them implies a weak form of the other one via the following duality results: For a metrizable space X, C p (X) is M -separable (resp. H-separable) if and only if all finite powers of X are Menger (resp.…”
We prove that in the Laver model for the consistency of the Borel's conjecture, the product of any two H-separable spaces is M -separable.2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 03E35, 54D20. Secondary: 54C50, 03E05.
“…One of the motivations behind this question comes from spaces of continuous functions, see [8,Theorem 21]. In the case of general topological spaces there are ZFC examples of Hurewicz spaces whose product is not even Menger, see [18, §3] and the discussion in the introduction of [14]. That is why we concentrate in what follows on subspaces of the Cantor space 2 ω .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, the product of any two Hurewicz subspaces of 2 ω is Menger in the Laver and Miller models, see [14] and [19], respectively. In the Miller model we actually know that the product of finitely many Hurewicz subspaces of 2 ω is Menger (for the Laver model this is unknown even for three Hurewicz subspaces), because in this model the Menger property is preserved by products of subspaces of 2 ω , see [19].…”
We prove that the Hurewicz property is not preserved by finite products in the Miller model. This is a consequence of the fact that Miller forcing preserves ground model γ-spaces.2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 03E35, 54D20. Secondary: 54C50, 03E05.
We prove that CH implies the existence of a Cohen-indestructible mad family such that the Mathias forcing associated to its filter adds dominating reals, while b = c is consistent with the negation of this statement as witnessed by the Laver model for the consistency of Borel's conjecture.2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 03E35, 54D20. Secondary: 03E05.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.