8

5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


Filtration-equivalent
1
-separable abelian groups of
cardinality
1
Saharon Shelah and Lutz Str ungmann
Abstract. We show that it is consistent with ordinary set theory ZFC and
the generalized continuum hypothesis that there exist two
1
-separable abelian
groups of cardinality
1
which are ltration-equivalent and one is a Whitehead
group but the other is not. This solves one of the open problems from [EkMe].
Introduction
An
1
-separable abelian group is an abelian group G such that every countable
subgroup is contained in a free direct summand of G. This property is apparently
stronger than the property of being strongly
1
-free; however, the two properties
coincide for groups of cardinality at most
1
in models of Martins Axiom (MA)
and the negation of the continuum hypothesis (CH). Over the years the vari-
ety and abundance of
1
-separable groups obtained by various constructions has
demonstrated the failure of certain attempts to classify
1
-separable groups of car-
dinality
1
. In brief, one can say that positive results towards classication can
be given assuming MA+CH and negative results are obtained assuming CH or
even the axiom of constructibility V = L. A good survey is for instance [EkMe,
Chapter VIII].
There are four principal methods of constructing
1
-free groups: as the union of
an ascending chain of countable free groups; in terms of generators and relations;
2000 Mathematics Subject Classication: 20K15, 20K20, 20K35, 20K40
Number 855 in Shelahs list of publications. The rst author was supported by project No. I-706-
54.6/2001 of the German-Israeli Foundation for Scientic Research & Development.
The second author was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation DFG.
1
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


2 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
as a subgroup of a divisible group; and as a pure subgroup of Z
1
. In the study of

1
-separable groups it turned out to be helpful to consider the concept of ltration-
equivalence, a relation between two
1
-separable groups. Recall that two groups
A and B of cardinality
1
are called ltration-equivalent if they have ltrations
{A

:
1
} and {B

:
1
} respectively such that for all
1
, there is
an isomorphism

: A

satisfying

[A

] = B

for all . Such an

isomorphism is called level-preserving. Note that it is not required that

extends

when and note also that ltration-equivalent groups A and B are also
quotient-equivalent, i.e. for all
1
we have A
+1
/A

= B
+1
/B

.
Under the hypothesis of Martins Axiom the notion of ltration-equivalence rep-
resents the end of the search; more precisely, assuming MA + CH, ltration-
equivalent
1
-separable groups are isomorphic. Assuming even the proper forcing
axiom (PFA) every
1
-separable group (of cardinality
1
) is of a special standard
form. However, in L there exist non-isomorphic
1
-separable groups of cardinality

1
which are ltration-equivalent.
In [EkMe, Open problems on the structure of Ext Nr.6] (see also [Ek]) Eklof
and Mekler asked whether or not it is consistent with ZFC that there exist two
ltration-equivalent
1
-separable groups of cardinality
1
such that one is a White-
head group and the other is not. Recall that a Whitehead group is an abelian
group G satisfying Ext(G, Z) = 0. The class of Whitehead groups is closed under
direct sums and subgroups and contains the class of free abelian groups. However,
the question whether all Whitehead groups are free is undecidable in ZFC as was
shown by the rst author in [Sh1], [Sh2]. Similarly, we shall show in this paper
that the answer to the question by Eklof and Mekler is armative even assuming
GCH.
All groups are abelian and notation is in accordance with [Fu] and [EkMe]. For
further details on
1
-separable groups and set theory we refer to [EkMe].
The Construction
Using special ladder systems we construct
1
-separable abelian groups of cardinal-
ity
1
with a prescribed -invariant. The construction is similar to the one given
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 3
in [EkMe, Chapter XIII, Section 0].
Throughout this paper let S
1
be a stationary and co-stationary subset of
1
.
Since lim(
1
) is a closed and unbounded subset of
1
we may assume without loss
of generality that S consists of limit ordinals of conality only. We shall further
require that
2
divides for every S. We recall the denition of a ladder and
a ladder system.
Definition 1.1. We use the following notions:
(i) A ladder on S is a strictly increasing sequence

= {

(n) : n }
of non-limit ordinals less than which is conal in , i.e. sup{

(n) :
n } = .
(ii) The ladder

is a special ladder if there exists a sequence 0 < k

0
<
k

1
< < k

n
< of natural numbers such that
(a)

(k

n
+i) + =

(k

n
+j) + for all i, j < k

n+1
k

n
;
(b)

(k

n
) + <

(k

n+1
).
for all n .
Note that the existence of S and certain ladders on S is well-known. However, any
limit ordinal of the form = + obviously does not allow the existence of a
special ladder. This is the reason why we have required that
2
divides for every
S, and hence no S can be of the form = + . For S all ladders
are special but we will continue to use the word special because this concept makes
sense also if is not a multiple of
2
.
Example 1.2. The following are natural examples of the ladders on :
(i) Let k

n
= 2n for all n . Then is special if and only if
(2n) + = (2n + 1) + < (2n + 2);
(ii) Let k

n
= n for all n . Then is special if and only if
(n) + < (n + 1).
For S we let

be the set of all special ladders on .

We now collect ladder systems containing special ladders.
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


4 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
Definition 1.3. A system =

: S of (special) ladders is called a (special)

ladder system on S.
We put
E = { : is a special ladder system}.
For later use we also dene
E

= {

: E,

: S }
for <
1
. On the set of special ladders we dene the -range function as follows:
rd() = (k

n
) + : n .
Note that rd() determines all values of (n) + (n ) since the ladder
is special. Moreover, if E, then put rd( ) = rd(

) : S and similarly
rd

( ) = rd

) = rd(

) : S for <
1
.
Using the special ladder systems we can now dene our desired groups. Let E
be a special ladder system and put k

n
= k

n
for all S and n . Moreover, let
t

n
= k

n+1
k

n
for all n . We dene a Q-module
F =

<1
x

S,n
y
,n
Q
freely generated (as a vectorspace) by the independent elements x

( <
1
) and
y
,n
( S, n ). Our desired group will be constructed as a subgroup of F.
Therefore, given a group G F, we dene a canonical
1
-ltration of G by letting
G

= G ({x

: < +} {y
,n
: S , n })

G
for <
1
. Here

denotes the purication of in G. Then {G

: <
1
}
is an increasing chain of pure subgroups of G such that G =

<1
G

. However,
the chain is not continuous since for instance G

n
G
n
but this is not needed
in the sequel and we will still call it a ltration. For simplicity let y

= y
,0
for
S. Let : be a xed function with (n) = 0 for all n and choose
integers a
,n
l
for l < t

n
such that gcd(a
,n
l
: l < t

n
) = 1 for all n and S. We
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 5
dene elements z
,n
F via
(1.1) z
,n
=
n1

i=0
1
(i)
y

+
n1

i=0
n1

j=i
1
(j)
_
_

l<t

i
a
,i
l
x

(k

i
+l)
_
_
for S and n . Furthermore we put z
,0
= y

and let a =
_
a
,n
l
: l < t

n
, n , S
_
.
Let G
, a

= x

, z
,n
: <
1
, S, n F. Then easy calculations show that
the generating relations satised by the generators of G
, a

are
(1.2) (n)z
,n+1
= z
,n
+

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
for S and n .
Lemma 1.4. Let G
, a

= x

, z
,n
: <
1
, S, n F be as above. Then
G
, a

admits a free presentation of the form
0 Y X G
, a

0
where X is the free group X =

<1
Zx

S,n
Zz
,n
and Y is the subgroup of
X generated by the elements (n)z
,n+1
z
,n

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
for S and
n .
Proof. That the elements (n)z
,n+1
z
,n

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
for S
and n are in the kernel Y is clear and that they generate Y is easily established
and therefore left to the reader.
To simplify notation we shall omit in the sequel the superscript (, a) since the
function and the vector a of integers will always be clear from the context.
However, the reader should keep in mind that for every ladder system the group
G

= G
, a

always depends on the additional parameters and a. We consider
Example 1.2 again.
Example 1.5. The following hold:
(i) Let be a special ladder system consisting of special ladders as dened
in Example 1.2 (i) and choose a
,n
0
= 1, a
,n
1
= 1 for all S and
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


6 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
n . Then G

satises the following relations
(n)z
,n+1
= z
,n
+x

(2n)
x

(2n+1)
(ii) Let be a special ladder system consisting of special ladders as dened
in Example 1.2 (ii) and choose a
,n
0
= 1 for all S and n . Then
G

satises the following relations
(n)z
,n+1
= z
,n
+x

(n)
We now prove some properties of the constructed groups G

.
Lemma 1.6. Let E. Then the group G

is a torsion-free
1
-separable abelian
group of size
1
with (G

) =

S.
Proof. Let E be a special ladder system. Clearly the group G

is a
torsion-free group of cardinality
1
. We rst prove that G

is
1
-free. Therefore,
let H be a nite rank subgroup of G

. Then there exists a nite subset
T {x

: <
1
} {z
,n
: S, n }
such that
H t : t T

G

.
Let T
S
= { S : z
,n
T for some n }. We can enlarge T (not changing T
S
)
so that there exists an integer m such that
for T
S
we have z
,n
T if and only if n m;
for y

= z
,0
T we have x

(n)
T if and only if n < k

m+1
.
Then using equation (1.2) it is not hard to see that t : t T

is freely generated
by the elements {z
,m
: y

T} {x

(n)
: n < k

m+1
, y

T}. Thus H is free and

therefore G

is
1
-free.
It remains to prove that G

is
1
-separable. Therefore let {G

: <
1
} be
the canonical
1
-ltration of G

. We shall now dene for all S a projection

: G

G

such that

= id
G

. Let S be given. For every +
let

(x

) = 0; for S with > let n

be maximal with

(k

) < . Hence

(k

+i) < + for all i < t

and

(k

+1
) > +. Let

(z
,n
) = 0 for all
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 7
n n

. Moreover, put

(y

) =
n

i=0
i1

j=0
(j + 1)

l<t

i
a
,i
l
x

(k

i
+l)
and nally

(z
,n
) =
n

i=n
i1

j=n
(j + 1)

l<t

i
a
,i
l
x

(k

i
+l)
for all n < n

. Letting

= id
G

it is now straightforward to check that

is
a well-dened homomorphism as claimed using equation (1.2). Finally, (G

) =

S
follows immediately by an easy checking that G
+1

/G

is not free for S.
We now prove that a special ladder system is suciently separated.
Lemma 1.7. Let E and <
1
. Then there exists a sequence of integers
m

: S such that the sets {

(k

n
) + : n m

} ( S ) are pairwise
disjoint. In particular, the sets {

(k

n
+ i) : n m

, i < t

n
} ( S ) are
pairwise disjoint.
Proof. Let E and <
1
be given. Since is countable we may enu-
merate S by , say S = {
k
: k }. We shall now dene inductively the
sequence m

k
: k such that for every k the sets
(1.3) {
j
(k
j
n
) + : n m
j
} (j k) are pairwise disjoint.
We start with k = 1, hence
0
and
1
are given. In order to carry on the induction
we shall prove a stronger result. Let m
0
be xed but arbitrary. We claim that
there is m
1
such that (1.3) holds for k = 1. Assume rst that
0
<
1
. Since
S lim(
1
) and
2
| for all S we obtain
1
>
0
+ . Hence it is easy to see
that m
1
exists such that (1.3) is satised for k = 1 because
1
is a ladder with
sup(Im(
1
)) =
1
.
Assume
1
<
0
, then
0
>
1
+ . Thus there is m

1
such that {
0
(k
0
n
) + :
n m

1
} and {
1
(k
1
n
) + : n m

1
} are disjoint. Increasing m

1
suciently we
obtain m
1
m

1
such that (1.3) holds.
The inductive step is now immediate. Given k such that m
0
, m
1
, , m

k1
sat-
isfy (1.3) we obtain integers s
j
for j < k such that {
j
(k
j
n
) + : n m
j
}
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


8 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
and {

k
(k

k
n
) + : n s
j
} are pairwise disjoint for every j < k. Choosing
m

k
= max{s
j
: j < k} we satisfy (1.3).
Note that Lemma 1.7 can give the same sequence of integers for dierent , E
if rd( ) = rd( ). Nevertheless, the next lemma shows that special ladder systems
, E with rd( ) = rd( ) do not overlap very much.
Lemma 1.8. Let , E and <
1
such that rd( ) = rd( ). Moreover, let
m

: S be the sequence from Lemma 1.7. If

(k

n
+j) =

(k

m
+i) for
some n m

, m m

, and i < t

m
, j < t

n
. Then =

and m = n.
Proof. Assume that

(k

n
+ j) =

(k

m
+ i) for some n m

, m m

,
and i < t

m
, j < t

n
. Then

(k

n
+j) + =

(k

n
) + =

(k

m
+i) + =

(k

m
) + =

(k

m
) +
since rd( ) = rd( ). Thus =

by Lemma 1.7. Moreover, m = n follows since

is a special ladder.
Recall that two groups A and B of cardinality
1
are called ltration-equivalent if
they have ltrations {A

:
1
} and {B

:
1
} respectively such that for
all
1
, there is an isomorphism

: A

satisfying

[A

] = B

for all
. Such an isomorphism is called level-preserving. Note that we do not require
that

extends

when and note that ltration-equivalent groups A and

B are also quotient-equivalent, i.e. for all
1
we have A
+1
/A

= B
+1
/B

.
Proposition 1.9. Let , E such that rd( ) = rd( ). Then the groups G

and
G

are ltration-equivalent.
Proof. Let and be given. By construction we have
G

= x

, z
,n
: <
1
, S, n
and
G

= x

, w
,n
: <
1
, S, n
such that the elements z
,n
and w
,n
( S, n ) are dened as in (1.1) for
and respectively. Hence, the generating relations satised in G

and G

are
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 9
the relations in equation (1.2) (see Lemma 1.4). Since ltration-equivalence is a
transitive property it suces to prove the result when G

is of the simplest form
(k

n
= n, t

n
= 1, a

,n
0
= 1), and hence
(n)z
,n+1
= z
,n
+x

(n)
and
(n)w
,n+1
= w
,n
+

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
.
Note that the parameters k

n
, t

n
and a
,n
l
depend on

. Moreover, we shall assume

for simplicity and without loss of generality that a
,n
0
= 1 for every S, n
since gcd(a
,n
l
: l < t

n
) = 1. Hence we may replace the basis element x

(k

n
)
by the
new basis element

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
.
Let G

=

<1
G

and G

=

<1
G

be the canonical
1
-ltrations of G

and G

respectively. For each <
1
we now dene a level-preserving isomorphism from
G

onto G

. Let <
1
be xed. Since by assumption rd( ) = rd( ) we may
choose a sequence m

: S as in Lemma 1.7 for and simultaneously.

Let : G

be dened via
(x

(n)
) =

l<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+l)
for all n m

, S
(x

(k

n
)
) = x

(n)
for all n m

, S if

(n) =

(k

n
)
(x

) = x

for every < + otherwise and

(z
,n
) = w
,n
for all n m

, S .
Recursively we may dene (z
,n
) for n < m

( S ) using the denition of

on x

( < +) and on z
,m

. By the choice of the sequence m

: S it
is now easy to see that is a level preserving isomorphism from G

onto G

and
hence the groups G

and G

are ltration-equivalent.
2. The Consistency Result
From now on we let : be given by (n) = n! with the convention that
0! = 1. In order to force that the group G

is a Whitehead group we recall the
denition of the uniformization property.
Definition 2.1. If is a cardinal and is a ladder system on S we say that
has uniformization if for every family {c

: S} of colorings c

: , there
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


10 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
exist :
1
and

: S such that (

(n)) = c

(n) for all n

() and
S.
The following lemma is by now standard (compare [EkMe, Chapter XIII, Proposi-
tion 0.2]). However, the construction in [EkMe, Chapter XIII, Section 0] is slightly
dierent from our construction since x

(k

n
+i)
(i < t

n
) appear in equation (1.2)
at the same time. Therefore, we give the adjusted proof of the next lemma in a
particular case for the convenience of the reader. However, we shall only apply it
for of the simplest form as in Example 1.5 (ii).
Lemma 2.2. If is a ladder system which has
0
-uniformization, then the group
G

satises Ext(G

, N) = 0 for every countable abelian group N. If has 2-
uniformization then G

is a Whitehead group.
Proof. Let N be a countable abelian group. For simplicity we shall assume
the setting of Example 1.5(i). The general proof is similiar. By construction we
may regard G

as the quotient P/Q of the free group P =

<1
x

S,n
z
,n
Z
and its subgroup Q generated by the elements
g
,n
= n!z
,n+1
z
,n
x

(2n+1)
+x

(2n)
for S and n . In order to show that Ext(G

, N) = 0 it therefore suces to
prove that every homomorphism : Q N has an extension : P N. Thus
let Hom(Q, N) be given. We x a bijection b : N
0
and dene c

:
for S as follows: Let n and put
c

(2n) = b((g
,n
)) and c

(2n + 1) = b(2(g
,n
)).
By the uniformization property there exists f :
1
such that for all S
there exists k

such that
c

(n) = f(

(n)) for all n > k

.
We dene : P N as follows: Let <
1
If =

(n) for some S and n > k

then put (x

) = b
1
(f());
note that S;
If S and =

(n) for any S and n > k

then put (x

) = 0;
if S and 2n > k

then put (z
,n
) = 0;
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 11
if S and 2n k

then we dene (z
,n
) inductively and distinguish
the following four cases:
if

(2n) =

(k) for some k > k

and

(2n+1) =

(k

) for some
k

> k

then put
(z
,n
) = b
1
(f(

(2n + 1))) b
1
(f(

(2n))) (g
,n
) +n! (z
,n+1
);
if

(2n) =

(k) for some k > k

but

(2n + 1) =

(k

) for all
k

> k

and

S then put
(z
,n
) = b
1
(f(

(2n))) (g
,n
) +n! (z
,n+1
);
if

(2n) =

(k) for all k > k

and S but

(2n + 1) =

(k

)
for some k

> k

then put
(z
,n
) = b
1
(f(

(2n + 1))) (g
,n
) +n! (z
,n+1
);
if

(2n) =

(k) for all k > k

and S and also

(2n + 1) =

(k

) for all k

> k

and

S then put
(z
,n
) = (g
,n
) +n! (z
,n+1
).
It now remains to show that is an extension of , and hence satises (g
,n
) =
(g
,n
) for all S and n . Clearly we have
(g
,n
) = n! (z
,n+1
) (z
,n
) (x
(2n)
) + (x
(2n+1)
).
If S and 2n > k

then
(x
(2n)
) = b
1
(f(

(2n))) = b
1
(c

(2n)) = (g
,n
)
and similarly (x
(2n+1)
) = 2(g
,n
). Furthermore, (z
,n
) = (z
,n+1
) = 0 and
hence
(g
,n
) = (g
,n
) + 2(g
,n
) = (g
,n
).
All other cases can be checked similarly by easy calculations and are therefore left
to the reader.
The second statement follows similarly using [EkMe, Chapter XIII, Lemma 0.3]
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


12 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
Similarly, we can prove the next result which is essentially [EkMe, Chapter XIII,
Proposition 0.6]. Recall that a ladder system is called tree-like if

(n) =

(m)
for some ,

S and n, m implies m = n and

(k) =

(k) for all k n.

Lemma 2.3. Let be a special tree-like ladder system. If G

satises Ext(G

, Z
()
) =
0, then has
0
-uniformization. Similarly, if G

is a Whitehead group, then has
2-uniformization.
Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 2.2 we shall assume for simplicity the setting
of Example 1.5 and let G

= P/Q. Let {a
nmj
: n, m, j } be a basis of Z
()
.
Given an -coloring {c

: S} dene : Q Z
()
by
(g
,n
) = a
nc

(2n+1)c

(2n+2)
.
By hypothesis there exists an extension of to : P Z
()
. Dene

() to be
the least integer n

> 4 such that

(z
,0
) a
lmj
: l < n

, m, j .
It suces to show that if

(k) =

(k) where k

(),

() then c

(k) =
c

(k). In this case (

(k))) = c

(k) when k

() is as required. Thus let

k

(),

() and

(k) =

(k). Then k = 2n + 1 or 2n + 2 for some n

with 2 n . Let

be the composition of with the projection of Z

()
onto
a
kmj
: m, j . Then

(z
,0
) =

(z
,0
) = 0.
Since is tree-like we have x

(s)
= x
(s)
for all s k. Using this and the fact
that

(g
,n
) =

(g
,n
) = 0 for all n

< k we can show by induction that

(z
,n
) =

(z
,n
).
Hence
a
nc

(2n+1)c

(2n+2)
a
nc(2n+1)c(2n+2)
= (g
,n
)(g
,n
) = n!(

(z
,n+1
)

(z
,n+1
).
Therefore n! divides a
nc

(2n+1)c

(2n+2)
a
nc(2n+1)c(2n+2)
; so a
nc

(2n+1)c

(2n+2)
must equal a
nc(2n+1)c(2n+2)
since they are basis elements and hence c

(k) = c

(k)
since either k = 2n + 1 or k = 2n + 2.
The second statement follows similarly with the appropriate adjustments and [EkMe,
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 13
Chapter XIII, Proposition 0.6].
We are now ready to prove the main theorem. Therefore let be a special ladder
system and c = c

: {0, 1}| S a sequence of colorings. We dene a group

H
, c
as follows. Similar to the group G

constructed in the previous section we let
F

be the Q-module
F

= wQ

<1
x

S,n
y

,n
Q
and H
, c
be the subgroup of F

generated by
H
, c
= w, x

, z
,n
: <
1
, S, n

,
where the z
,n
are chosen subject to the relations
n! z
,n+1
= z
,n
+

i<t

n
a
,n
l
x

(k

n
+i)
+ c

(n) w
for S and n . We dene a natural mapping h
, c
: H
, c
G

via
h
, c
( x

) = x

for all <

1
;
h
, c
( z
,n
) = z
,n
for all S and n ;
h
, c
( w) = 0.
Obviously, the kernel of h
, c
is isomorphic to Z, in fact ker(h
, c
) = wZ. Thus h
, c
induces a short exact sequence
(E) 0 Z H
, c
G

0.
As for G

we also dene a ltration for H
, c
by letting
H

, c
=

H
, c
({ , x

: < +} {y

,n
: S , n })
_

H
, c
for <
1
.
The idea for proving the main theorem is to build an extension model of ZFC in
which GCH holds and in which we can force two special ladder systems and
with rd( ) = rd( ) such that has the 2-uniformization property, and hence G

is a
Whitehead group but at the same time we force a coloring c such that the sequence
(E) does not split, and hence G

is not a Whitehead group. For notational reasons
we call a special ladder system of the simplest form as in Example 1.5 (ii) a simple
special ladder system.
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


14 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
Theorem 2.4. There exists a model of ZFC in which GCH holds and for some
special ladder systems , E with rd( ) = rd( ), the group G

is a Whitehead
group, but G

is not.
Proof. Essentially the proof is given in [Sh2] (see also [Sh1] and [Sh3]).
Therefore we only recall the basic steps of the proof. Suppose we start with a
ground model V in which GCH holds. Let be a (special) ladder system. It was
shown in [Sh1, Theorem 1.1] that there exists a forcing notion (P, ) such that:
|P| =
2
, P satises the
2
-chain condition and adds no new sequences
of length ; hence, if V satises GCH, then also the extension model V
P
satises GCH;
every stationary set remains stationary in V
P
;
has the 2-uniformization property (even the
0
-uniformization property
(see [Sh1, Theorem 2.1])).
The forcing notion (P, ) was obtained by a countable support iteration (of length

2
); at each step using a basic forcing extension and taking inverse limits at stages
of conality
0
. We briey recall the basic step to be iterated. Let c = c

: S
be a system of colors which has to be uniformized. Here each c

: 2. Dene
P
c
as the set of all functions f such that
(i) f : 2 for some <
1
;
(ii) for all , S there is n

such that f(

(m)) = c

(m) for all m n

.
P
c
is ordered naturally and it is easy to see that the set D

= {f P
c
:
Dom(f)} is dense for every <
1
and hence a generic lter will give the desired
uniformizing .
Now, assume that V GCH is given. We shall dene a countable support iteration

Q =
_
P

: <
2
_
as follows: We start with an initial forcing (compare also
[EkSh]).
Definition 2.5. Let P
0
consist of all triples , , c such that for some <
1
we
have
, E

are special ladder systems on S

is simple
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 15
c = c

: 2 | S
rd

( ) = rd

( ).
We may think of the conditions in P
0
as partial special ladder systems on S
for some <
1
and a corresponding partial coloring. It is easy to check that a
P
0
-generic lter G gives a pair of special ladder systems , on S (in the extension
model V [G]) with the same -range and a global coloring c. Moreover, will be sim-
ple. Let

,

and

c, c

be the corresponding P
0
-names which are dened naturally.
Note that P
0
is -closed and satises the
2
-chain condition, so GCH holds in V [G]
since it holds in V . Applying the forcing described above to V

= V [G] we can force

that in (V

)
P
the ladder system

has the 2-uniformization property and hence the
group G

is a Whitehead group. Here, we let P =
_
P

: 1 <
2
_
, hence
in V

Q
= (V

)
P
the generalized continuum hypothesis holds. We have to show that
the group G

is not a Whitehead group. As indicated this shall be done by showing
that the sequence (E) cannot be forced to split.
For the sake of contradiction assume that (E) splits. Hence for some p

Q we have
p f
, c
Hom(G

, H
, c
) is a right inverse of h
, c
.
Since

Q satises the
2
chain condition we can replace

Q by P

for some <

2
.
For an innite cardinal let H() be the class of sets hereditarily of cardinality
< , i.e. H() = {X : |TC(X)| < } where TC(X) is the transitive closure of the
set X. As in [Sh2] there is an elementary submodel N (H(
2
), ) such that
|N| =
0
;
p, f
, c
N
0
;
N =

n
N
n
with N
n
(H(
2
), ) elementary submodels such that
N
n
N
n+1
.
We let = N
1
S and
n
= N
n

1
for n . Note that can be chosen
from S because the set of s that can be obtained from Ns is a club and therefore
meets the stationary set S. Choose

such that

(n) [
n
,
n+1
] for all n
and

is simple and special.

As in [Sh1, Lemma 1.8] and [Sh2, Theorem 2.1] (see also [EkSh]) we dene in-
ductively a sequence of nite sets of conditions in the following way:
In stage n let

(n) = . We have a nite tree p

n
t
: t T
n
N
n+1
of conditions
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


16 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
and let k

n+1
= k

n
+|max(T
n
)| + 1. Moreover, if t max(T
n
), then
p
n
t
forces a value to f
, c

G
+
.
We now choose

(k

n
+ i) in [, + ] for i < t

n
so that

becomes special and

rd(

) = rd(

). We have that, if t max(T

n
), then
p
n
t
f
, c
(x

(k

n
+i)
) x

(k

n
+i)
= w

b
t,n,i

for every i < t

n
. By linear algebra we may choose a
,n
l
for l < t

n
such that
gcd(a
,n
l
: l < t

n
) = 1 and if t max(T
n
), then
p
n
t

i<t

n
a
,n
i

b
t,n,i
= 0.
Finally, we choose c

(n) arbitrarily. In the inverse limit we hence obtain a triple

, c

which we may increase to

, c

. Now we can nd p

above p
n
t
for some t max(T
n
) and all n . Note that the c

was chosen
arbitrarily, so there are 2
0
possible choices for the same

.
Now assume that G is a generic lter containing the condition p

. Then z
,0

f
, c
(z
,0
) wZ. Moreover,
n!f
, c
(z
,n+1
) = f
, c
(z
,n
) +

i<t

n
a
,n
i
f
, c
(x

(k

n
+i)
)
for every n . Similarly, we have
n! z
,n+1
= z
,n
+

i<t

n
a
,n
i
x

(k

n
+i)
+c

(n) w.
Subtracting the two equations yields
n!(f
, c
(z
,n+1
) z
,n+1
) = (f
, c
(z
,n
) z
,n
)+

i<t

n
a
,n
i
(f
, c
(x

(k

n
+i)
) x

(k

n
+i)
)c

(n) w.
But by our choice we have

i<t

n
a
,n
i
(f
, c
(x

(k

n
+i)
) x

(k

n
+i)
) =

i<t

n
a
,n
i
b
t,n,i
= 0.
Therefore, we get
(2.1) n!(f
, c
(z
,n+1
) z
,n+1
) = (f
, c
(z
,n
) z
,n
) c

(n) w Z w.
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


FILTRATION-EQUIVALENT 1-SEPARABLE ABELIAN GROUPS OF CARDINALITY 1 17
Since Z is countable there exist generic lters G
1
and G
2
(and corresponding triples
(
1
,
1
, c
1
) and (
2
,
2
, c
2
)) such that c
1

= c
2

,
1

=
2

but
z
,0
f

1
, c
1(z
,0
) = z
,0
f

2
, c
2(z
,0
) Z w.
Let n be minimal such that c
1

(n) = c
2

(n). Then an easy induction using equation

(2.1) shows that
f

1
, c
1(z
1
,l
) z
1
,l
= f

2
, c
2(z
2
,l
) z
2
,l
Z w
for every l n. Note that z
,i
depends on G
i
(i = 1, 2). We nally calculate
n!(f

1
, c
1(z
1
,n+1
) z
1
,n+1
) n!(f

2
, c
2(z
2
,n+1
) z
2
,n+1
)
= (f

1
, c
1(z
1
,n
) z
1
,n
) (f

2
, c
2(z
2
,n
) z
2
,n
) + (c
1

(n) c
2

(n)) w.
By equation (2.1) we conclude
n!(f

1
, c
1(z
1
,n+1
) z
1
,n+1
) n!(f

2
, c
2(z
2
,n+1
) z
2
,n+1
) = (c
1

(n) c
2

(n)) w.
However, the left side is divisible by 2 but the right side is w or w, hence not
divisible by 2 - a contradiction. Note that all the dierences are elements of the
pure subgroup wZ by equation (2.1). Hence the above calculations take place in
wZ which is in the ground model, although the elements we are talking about come
from dierent (incompatible) extension models. Thus the sequence (E) cannot be
forced to split and this nishes the proof.
At this point we would like to remark that it is not clear if the special ladder system

in the above proof is still simple?

Corollary 2.6. It is consistent with ZFC and GCH that there exist two ltration-
equivalent
1
-separable abelian groups of cardinality
1
such that one is Whitehead
and the other is not.
Proof. Applying Theorem 2.4 to a model V of GCH we get an extension
model of V in which there exist abelian groups G

and G

for , E such that
G

is a Whitehead group but G

is not. Since rd( ) = rd( ) we deduce that G

and G

are ltration-equivalent by Proposition 1.9.
8
5
5


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
8







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
2
0
0
9
-
1
1
-
1
9


18 SAHARON SHELAH AND LUTZ STR

UNGMANN
Acknowledgement: The authors would like to thank the referees for many helpful
comments and improvements.
References
[Ek] P.C. Eklof, The structure of
1
-separable groups, TAMS 279 (1983), 497523.
[EkMe] P.C. Eklof and A. Mekler, Almost Free Modules, Set- Theoretic Methods (revised
edition), Amsterdam, New York, North-Holland, Math. Library (2002).
[EkSh] P.C. Eklof and S. Shelah, The structure of Ext(A, Z) and GCH: possible co-Moore
spaces, Math. Zeitschrift 239 (2002), 143157.
[Fu] L. Fuchs, Innite Abelian Groups, Vol. I and II, Academic Press (1970 and 1973).
[Je] T. Jech, Set Theory, Academic Press, New York (1973).
[Ku] K. Kunen, Set Theory - An Introduction to Independence Proofs, Studies in Logic and the
Foundations of Mathematics, North Holland, 102 (1980).
[Sh1] S. Shelah, Whitehead groups may not be free even assuming CH, I, Israel J. Math. 28
(1977), 193203.
[Sh2] S. Shelah, Whitehead groups may not be free even assuming CH, II, Israel J. Math. 35
(1980), 257285.
[Sh3] S. Shelah, The consistency of Ext(G, Z) = Q, Israel J. Math. 39 (1981), 7482.
Department of Mathematics, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, and Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, NJ U.S.A.
E-mail address: Shelah@math.huji.ac.il
Department of Mathematics, University of Duisburg-Essen, 45117 Essen, Germany
E-mail address: lutz.struengmann@uni-essen.de