It is shown that the resurrection axiom and the maximality principle may be consistently combined for various iterable forcing classes. The extent to which resurrection and maximality overlap is explored via the local maximality principle.

We show that Dependent Choice is a sufficient choice principle for developing the basic theory of proper forcing, and for deriving generic absoluteness for the Chang model in the presence of large cardinals, even with respect to $\mathsf {DC}$ -preserving symmetric submodels of forcing extensions. Hence, $\mathsf {ZF}+\mathsf {DC}$ not only provides the right framework for developing classical analysis, but is also the right base theory over which to safeguard truth in analysis from the independence phenomenon in the presence of large cardinals. We also investigate some basic consequences of the Proper Forcing Axiom in $\mathsf {ZF}$ , and formulate a natural question about the generic absoluteness of the Proper Forcing Axiom in $\mathsf {ZF}+\mathsf {DC}$ and $\mathsf {ZFC}$ . Our results confirm $\mathsf {ZF} + \mathsf {DC}$ as a natural foundation for a significant portion of “classical mathematics” and provide support to the idea of this theory being also a natural foundation for a large part of set theory.

We show that a $(\kappa ^{+},1)$ -simplified morass can be added by a forcing with working parts of size smaller than $\kappa $ . This answers affirmatively the question, asked independently by Shelah and Velleman in the early 1990s, of whether it is possible to do so.

Our argument use a modification of a technique of Mitchell’s for adding objects of size $\omega _2$ in which collections of models – all of equal, countable size – are used as side conditions. In our modification, whilst the individual models are, as in Mitchell’s technique, taken ad hoc from quite general classes, the collections of models are very highly structured, in a way that is somewhat different from, perhaps more stringent than, Mitchell’s original, arguably making the method more wieldy and giving the prospect of further uses with more delicate working parts.

A union ultrafilter is an ultrafilter over the finite subsets of ω that has a base of sets of the form ${\text{FU}}\left( X \right)$, where X is an infinite pairwise disjoint family and ${\text{FU}}(X) = \left\{ {\bigcup {F|F} \in [X]^{ < \omega } \setminus \{ \emptyset \} } \right\}$. The existence of these ultrafilters is not provable from the $ZFC$ axioms, but is known to follow from the assumption that ${\text{cov}}\left( \mathcal{M} \right) = \mathfrak{c}$. In this article we obtain various models of $ZFC$ that satisfy the existence of union ultrafilters while at the same time ${\text{cov}}\left( \mathcal{M} \right) = \mathfrak{c}$.

Extending the work of Larson and Todorcevic, we show that there is a model of set theory in which normal spaces are collectionwise Hausdorff if they are either first countable or locally compact, and yet there are no first countable $L$-spaces or compact $S$-spaces. The model is one of the form $\text{PFA}\left( S \right)\left[ S \right]$, where $S$ is a coherent Souslin tree.

Assuming the Continuum Hypothesis, there is a compact, first countable, connected space of weight ${{\aleph }_{1}}$ with no totally disconnected perfect subsets. Each such space, however, may be destroyed by some proper forcing order which does not add reals.

We continue the investigation of Gregory trees and the Cantor Tree Property carried out by Hart and Kunen. We produce models of MA with the Continuum arbitrarily large in which there are Gregory trees, and in which there are no Gregory trees.

To any metric space it is possible to associate the cardinal invariant corresponding to the least number of rectifiable curves in the space whose union is not meagre. It is shown that this invariant can vary with the metric space considered, even when restricted to the class of convex subspaces of separable Banach spaces. As a corollary it is obtained that it is consistent with set theory that any set of reals of size ℵ1 is meagre yet there are ℵ1 rectifiable curves in ℝ3 whose union is not meagre. The consistency of this statement when the phrase “rectifiable curves” is replaced by “straight lines” remains open.