4

3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


All meager lters may be null
Tomek Bartoszynski

Boise State University

Boise, Idaho
and
Hebrew University
Jerusalem
Martin Goldstern

Bar Ilan University

Ramat Gan, Israel
Haim Judah

Bar Ilan University

Ramat Gan, Israel
Saharon Shelah

Hebrew University
Jerusalem
October 6, 2003
Abstract
We show that it is consistent with ZFC that all lters which have the
Baire property are Lebesgue measurable. We also show that the existence
of a Sierpinski set implies that there exists a nonmeasurable lter which
has the Baire property.
The goal of this paper is to show yet another example of nonduality between
measure and category.
Suppose that T is a nonprincipal lter on . Identify T with the set of char-
acteristic functions of its elements. Under this convention T becomes a subset of
2

and a question about its topological or measure-theoretical properties makes

sense.
It has been proved by Sierpinski that every non-principal lter has either
Lebesgue measure zero or is nonmeasurable. Similarly it is either meager or
does not have the Baire property.
In [T] Talagrand proved that
Theorem 0.1 There exists a measurable lter which does not have the Baire
property.

The author thanks the Lady Davis Fellowship Trust for full support

Supported by the Israel Academy of Sciences (Basic Research Fund)

Publication 434
1
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


In fact we have an even stronger result. In [Ba] it is proved that
Theorem 0.2 Every measurable lter can be extended to a measurable lter
which does not have the Baire property.
We show that the dual result is false.
1 A model where all meager lters are null
In this section we prove the following theorem:
Theorem 1.1 It is consistent with ZFC that every lter which has the Baire
property is measurable.
Proof We will use the following more general result:
Theorem 1.2 Let V [= GCH and suppose that V[G] is a generic extension
extension of V obtained adding
2
Cohen reals. Then in V[G] for any two sets
A, B 2

if A + B = a + b : a A, b B is a meager set then either A or

B has measure zero.
Proof Note that we apply this lemma only for the case A = B. Therefore to
simplify the notation we assume that A = B. The proof of the general case is
almost the same. We follow [Bu].
We will use the following notation. Let
Fn(X, 2) = s : dom(s) [X]
<
and range(s) 0, 1
be the notion of forcing adding [X[-many Cohen reals. For s Fn(X, 2) let
[s] = f 2
X
: s f.
Let V [= GCH be a model of ZFC and let G
2
be a Fn(
2
, 2)-generic
lter over V. Clearly c =

G
2
is a generic sequence of
2
Cohen reals and
V[c] = V[G
2
].
Let F
n
: n be a sequence of closed, nowhere dense sets such that
A + A

n
F
n
. Without loss of generality we can assume that F
n
: n
V.
Let a

: <
2
be an enumeration of all elements of A. For every <
2
let a

be a name for a

. In other words for every <

2
we have a countable
set I

2
such that a

is a Borel function from 2

I

into 2

. Moreover a

is
the value of of the function a

on Cohen real i.e. a

(c[I

) = a

. In addition we
can nd a dense G

set H

2
I

such that a

[H

is a continuous function.
For , , <
2
dene

if
1. I

and I

are order isomorphic,

2. the order-isomorphism between I

and I

transfers a

onto a

and H

onto
H

,
2
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


3. I

= I

.
Notice that for every <
2
the relation

is an equivalence relation with

1
many equivalence classes.
Lemma 1.3 There exists

<
2
such that
, (

& I

) = ) .
Proof For every <
2
let c

be the set []

: <
2
of

-equivalence
classes. Let
c
0

= E c

: sup
E
(min(I

)) <
2
and
c
1

= c

c
0

.
Let
() = sup
EE
0

(sup
E
(min(I

))) .
Note that () <
2
since [c

[ <
1
.
Find

<
2
such that () <

for all <

and cf(

) =
1
. We claim
that

satises the statement of the lemma.

Take any <
2
and any . If <

or I

, then we can choose = .

So assume >

and I

,= . There is <

such that I

= I

.
Let E = []

.
Case 1 E c
0

. Then
sup
E
(min(I

)) () <

which is a contradiction since min(I

and E.
Case 2 E , c
0

. So
sup
E
(min(I

)) =
2
hence there is E with min(I

) i.e. I

( ) = .
So I

= I

= I

= I

, where the last equality holds because

I

) I

( ) = . Also I

) I

( ) = .
Let

be the ordinal from the above lemma. Work in V

= V[c[

].
For every <
2
dene
D

= s Fn(
2

, 2) : cl( a

([s])) has measure zero .

Lemma 1.4 D

is dense in Fn(
2

, 2) for every <

2
.
3
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


Proof Notice that it is enough to show that D

Fn(I

, 2) is dense in
Fn(I

, 2) for <
2
.
Suppose that this fails. Find <
2
and s
0
Fn(I

, 2) such that for

all s s
0
the set cl( a

([s])) has positive measure.

Using the lemma with > sup(I

) we can nd <
2
such that

and (I

) (I

) = . Notice that there exists t

0
Fn(I

, 2)
(the image of s
0
under the isomorphism between I

and I

) such that for every

t t
0
the set cl( a

([t])) has positive measure.

Since s
0
and t
0
have disjoint domains, s
0
t
0
Fn(
2

, 2). Find n
and a condition u Fn(
2

, 2) extending s
0
t
0
such that u a

( c) +
a

( c) F
n
. u can be written as u
1
u
2
u
3
where s
0
u
1
Fn(I

, 2),
t
0
u
2
Fn(I

, 2) and u
3
Fn(
2
(I

), 2). By the assumption

the sets cl( a

([u
1
])), cl( a

([u
2
])) have positive measure. By well-known theorem
of Steinhaus the set cl( a

([u
1
])) + cl( a

([u
2
])) contains an open set (hence also
(cl( a

([u
1
])) + cl( a

([u
2
]))) F
n
contains an open set). Using the fact that a

and a

are continuous functions we can nd u

1
s
1
Fn(I

, 2) and
u
2
t
1
Fn(I

, 2) such that (cl( a

([s
1
])) + cl( a

([t
1
]))) F
n
= . But
this is a contradiction since
s
1
t
1
u
3
a

( c) + a

( c) , F
n
.
Notice that for <
2
D

= s Fn(I

) : there exists a closed measure zero set F V

such that s a

( c) F .
Therefore by the above lemma
A

F : F is a closed measure zero set coded in V

.
Since V contains Cohen reals over V

, the union of all closed measure zero sets

coded in V

has measure zero in V. We conclude that A has measure zero.

Let T be a non-principal lter. Denote by T
c
= X : X T.
T
c
is an ideal and it is very easy to see that T is measurable (has the Baire
property) i T
c
is measurable (has the Baire property).
Lemma 1.5 T +T = T
c
.
Proof Suppose that X, Y T. Then n : X(n) + Y (n) = 0 X
1
(1)
Y
1
(1) T. In general T + + T is equal to T or T
c
depending whether
there is an even or odd number of Ts.
Let V [= GCH and suppose that V[G] is a generic extension of V obtained
by adding
2
Cohen reals. By the above lemma if T is a meager lter then
T
c
= T +T is meager. So by 1.2 T has measure zero.
4
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


2 Filters which are meager and nonmeasurable
Theorem 1.1 shows that in order to construct a lter which is meager and
nonmeasurable we need some extra assumptions.
In [T] Talagrand showed that
Theorem 2.1 Suppose that the real line is not the union of < 2
0
many mea-
sure zero sets. Then there exists a nonmeasurable lter which is meager.
Let be a regular uncountable cardinal. Recall that S is a generalized Sierpinski
set of size if [S H < for every null set H. It is clear that all S

S of size
are also nonmeasurable.
Theorem 2.2 Assume that there exists a generalized Sierpinski set. Then there
exists a nonmeasurable meager lter.
Proof Let S be a generalized Sierpinski set of size . Build a sequence x

:
< S and an elementary chain of models M

: < of size such that

1. x

: < M

for < ,
2. x

is a random real over M

for > .
Suppose that M

, x

are already constructed for < . Since S is a Sierpinski

set

S H : H is a null set coded in M

for <
has size < . Let x

be any element of S avoiding this set.

Let X

= x
1

(1) for < . Let T be the lter generated by the family

X

: < . We will show that T has the required properties.

For X let
d(X) = lim
n
[X n[
n
if the above limit exists.
By easy induction we show that for
1
, . . . ,
n
< we have d(X
1

X
n
) = 2
n
. This shows that
T X : liminf
n
[X n[
n
> 0
which is a meager set. To check that T is nonmeasurable notice that T contains
the nonmeasurable set x

: < .
It is an open problem whether one can construct a meager nonmeasurable
lter assuming the existence of a nonmeasurable set of size
1
. We only have
some partial results.
Let b be the size of the smallest unbounded family in

and let unif be

the size of the smallest nonmeasurable set.
For X let f
X

be an increasing function enumerating X. For a

lter T let T

= f
X
: X T. In [J] it is proved that
5
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


Theorem 2.3 For every lter T,
T has the Baire property i T

is bounded.
Theorem 2.4 Suppose that unif < b. Then there exists a nonmeasurable lter
which is meager.
Proof Let X 2

be a nonmeasurable set of size unif . Let M be a model of

the same size containing X as a subset. Then M2

does not have measure zero,

so it is nonmeasurable. Consider any lter T such that M [= T is an ultralter.
T generates a lter in V and this lter is meager by 2.3 and the fact that it is
generated by unif < b many elements. On the other hand M [= 2

= T T
c
and we know that M 2

is a nonmeasurable set. Hence T is nonmeasurable.

The previous theorem depended on the implication:
If T has measure zero then M 2

has measure zero.

This implication is not true in general for any set X M having outer measure
1 in M as is showed by the following example.
Example It is consistent with ZFC that there are models M V such that
only some sets which have outer measure 1 in M have measure 0 in V .
Let V = L[c][r

: <
1
)] where c is a Cohen real over L and r

: <
1
)
is a sequence of random reals over L[c] (added side by side). Let M = L[r

:
<
1
)]. Consider the set X = L 2

. It is known that X is a nonmeasurable

set in M but X has measure 0 in V. On the other hand the set r

: <
1

is nonmeasurable in V.
We conclude the paper with a canonical example of a lter which does not
generate an ultralter. In other words we have the following:
Theorem 2.5 Let M be a model for ZFC and let r be a real which does not
belong to M. Then there exists a lter T such that M [= T is an ultralter but
M[r] [= X : Y T Y X is not an ultralter .
Proof Let k
n
: n be a fast increasing sequence of natural numbers. Let
T be a tree on 2
<
such that:
1. For s T we have [s[ = k
n
i s

0 T and s

1 T,
2. let s
1
, . . . , s
2
n be the list of T 2
kn
in lexicographical order. Then
for every w T(2
n
) , 2
n
there exists m [k
n
+ 1, k
n+1
) such that
s
l
(m) = 0 i l w,
3. there is no m such that for all s T 2
m+1
we have s(m) = 0 or for
all s T 2
m+1
we have s(m) = 1.
6
4
3
4


r
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7







m
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
:
1
9
9
5
-
1
0
-
2
7


Let S T be a subtree of T. Dene
A
0
S
= m : s S 2
m+1
s(m) = 0 and
A
1
S
= m : s S 2
m+1
s(m) = 1 .
Let be the ideal generated by sets A
0
S
, A
1
S
: S is a perfect subtree of T.
One can easily verify that all nite subsets of belong to .
Lemma 2.6 is a proper ideal.
Proof Let S
1
, . . . , S
m
be perfect subtrees of T. Find n suciently big so that
[S
j
2
kn
[ > m for j m. Let s
1
, . . . , s
2
n be the list of T 2
kn
in lexicographical
ordering. Let w
1
, . . . , w
m
be such that S
j
2
kn
= s
i
: i w
j
for j m. Let
w = min(w
1
), . . . , min(w
m
). Then for all j, w
j
, w and w
j
w ,= . By the
denition of T there is k < k
n
such that w = l : s
l
(k) = 0. By the property
of w for every j m there exist s
0
, s
1
S
j
2
kn
such that s
0
(k) = 0 and
s
1
(k) = 1. Therefore k , A
0
S1
A
1
S1
A
0
Sm
A
1
Sm
.
Let T be any ultralter in M extending the lter X : X . Let r be
a real which does not belong to M. Without loss of generality we can assume
that r is a branch through T.
Assume that T generates an ultralter and let X
r
= n : r(n) = 1. We
can assume that there exists an element X T such that X X
r
. Let
S = s T : k X ([s[ > k s(k) = 1). Clearly r is a branch through S.
But in that case S contains a perfect subtree S
1
S (since it contains a new
branch). Therefore X A
1
S1
. Contradiction.
References
[Ba] T. Bartoszynski On the structure of the lters on a countable set to
appear
[Bu] M. Burke notes of June 17, 1989
[J] H. Judah Unbounded lters on , in Logic Colloquium 1987
[T] M. Talagrand Compacts de fonctions mesurables et ltres non-
mesurables, Studia Mathematica, T.LXVII, 1980.
7