Omitting types in set theory and arithmetic

1976 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia F. Knight
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Conservative Extension ◽  
Alternate Proof ◽  
Hanf Number ◽  
Omitting Types ◽  
Infinite Set ◽  
Models Of Set Theory

In [7] it is shown that if Σ is a type omitted in the structure = ω, +, ·, < and complete with respect to Th() then Σ is omitted in models of Th() of all infinite powers. The proof given there extends readily to other models of P. In this paper the result is extended to models of ZFC. For pre-tidy models of ZFC, the proof is a straightforward combination of the methods in [7] and in Keisler and Morley ([9], [6]). For other models, the proof involves forcing. In particular, it uses Solovay and Cohen's original forcing proof that GB is a conservative extension of ZFC (see [2, p. 105] and [5, p. 77]).The method of proof used for pre-tidy models of set theory can be used to obtain an alternate proof of the result for This new proof yields more information. First of all, a condition is obtained which resembles the hypothesis of the “Omitting Types” theorem, and which is sufficient for a theory T to have a model omitting a type Σ and containing an infinite set of indiscernibles. The proof that this condition is sufficient is essentially contained in Morley's proof [9] that the Hanf number for omitting types is so the condition will be called Morley's condition.If T is a pre-tidy theory, Morley's condition guarantees that T will have models omitting Σ in all infinite powers.

Types omitted in uncountable models of arithmetic

1975 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia F. Knight
Keyword(s):  
Completeness Theorem ◽  
Elementary Extension ◽  
Ramsey's Theorem ◽  
Definable Set ◽  
Ramsey’S Theorem ◽  
Hanf Number ◽  
Definable Sets ◽  
Omitting Types ◽  
Infinite Set ◽  
Models Of Arithmetic

In [4] it is shown that if the structure omits a type Σ, and Σ is complete with respect to Th(), then there is a proper elementary extension of which omits Σ. This result is extended in the present paper. It is shown that Th() has models omitting Σ in all infinite powers.A type is a countable set of formulas with just the variable ν occurring free. A structure is said to omit the type Σ if no element of satisfies all of the formulas of Σ. A type Σ, in the same language as a theory T, is said to be complete with respect to T if (1) T ∪ Σ is consistent, and (2) for every formula φ(ν) of the language of T (with just ν free), either φ or ¬φ is in Σ.The proof of the result of this paper resembles Morley's proof [5] that the Hanf number for omitting types is . It is shown that there is a model of Th() which omits Σ and contains an infinite set of indiscernibles. Where Morley used the Erdös-Rado generalization of Ramsey's theorem, a definable version of the ordinary Ramsey's theorem is used here.The “omitting types” version of the ω-completeness theorem ([1], [3], [6]) is used, as it was in Morley's proof and in [4]. In [4], satisfaction of the hypotheses of the ω-completeness theorem followed from the fact that, in , any infinite, definable set can be split into two infinite, definable sets.

Omitting types: application to recursion theory

1972 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Grilliot
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Model Theory ◽  
Significant Contribution ◽  
Hard Core ◽  
Completeness Theorem ◽  
Recursion Theory ◽  
Omitting Types ◽  
Admissible Ordinals ◽  
Models Of Set Theory

Omitting-types theorems have been useful in model theory to construct models with special characteristics. For instance, one method of proving the ω-completeness theorem of Henkin [10] and Orey [20] involves constructing a model that omits the type {x ≠ 0, x ≠ 1, x ≠ 2,···} (i.e., {x ≠ 0, x ≠ 1, x ≠ 2,···} is not satisfiable in the model). Our purpose in this paper is to illustrate uses of omitting-types theorems in recursion theory. The Gandy-Kreisel-Tait Theorem [7] is the most well-known example. This theorem characterizes the class of hyperarithmetical sets as the intersection of all ω-models of analysis (the so-called hard core of analysis). The usual way to prove that a nonhyperarithmetical set does not belong to the hard core is to construct an ω-model of analysis that omits the type representing the set (Application 1). We will find basis results for and s — sets that are stronger than results previously known (Applications 2 and 3). The question of how far the natural hierarchy of hyperjumps extends was first settled by a forcing argument (Sacks) and subsequently by a compactness argument (Kripke, Richter). Another problem solved by a forcing argument (Sacks) and then by a compactness argument (Friedman-Jensen) was the characterization of the countable admissible ordinals as the relativized ω1's. Using omitting-types technique, we will supply a third kind of proof of these results (Applications 4 and 5). S. Simpson made a significant contribution in simplifying the proof of the latter result, with the interesting side effect that Friedman's result on ordinals in models of set theory is immediate (Application 6). One approach to abstract recursiveness and hyperarithmeticity on a countable set is to tenuously identify the set with the natural numbers. This approach is equivalent to other approaches to abstract recursion (Application 7). This last result may also be proved by a forcing method.

scholarly journals The construction of groups in models of set theory that fail the Axiom of Choice

1976 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.L. Hickman
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Permutation Groups ◽  
Minimal Set ◽  
Chain Conditions ◽  
The Third ◽  
Independence Results ◽  
Minimal Groups ◽  
The Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Infinite Set ◽  
Models Of Set Theory

The purpose of this paper is to show that a well-known method for constructing “queer” sets in models of ZF set theory is also applicable to certain algebraic structures. An infinite set is called “quasi-minimal” if every subset of it is either finite or cofinite. In Section 1 I set out the two systems of set theory to be used in this paper, and illustrate the technique in its most fundamental form by constructing a model of set theory containing a quasi-minimal set. In Section 2 I show that by choosing the parameters appropriately, one can use this technique to obtain models of set theory containing groups whose carriers are quasi-minimal. In the third section various independence results are deduced from the existence of such models: in particular, it is shown that it is possible in ZF set theory to have an infinite group that satisfies both the ascending and descending chain conditions. The quasi-minimal groups constructed in Section 2 were all elementary abelian; in Section 4 it is shown that this was not just chance, but that in fact all quasi-minimal groups must be of this type. Finally in Section 5 permutations and permutation groups on quasi-minimal sets are examined.

Ultrapowers without the axiom of choice

1988 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 1208-1219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitchell Spector
Keyword(s):  
General Theory ◽  
Set Theory ◽  
Fundamental Theorem ◽  
Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Partition Relations ◽  
Omitting Types ◽  
The Axiom Of Choice ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Models Of Set Theory ◽  
Theory And Model

AbstractA new method is presented for constructing models of set theory, using a technique of forming pseudo-ultrapowers. In the presence of the axiom of choice, the traditional ultrapower construction has proven to be extremely powerful in set theory and model theory; if the axiom of choice is not assumed, the fundamental theorem of ultrapowers may fail, causing the ultrapower to lose almost all of its utility. The pseudo-ultrapower is designed so that the fundamental theorem holds even if choice fails; this is arranged by means of an application of the omitting types theorem. The general theory of pseudo-ultrapowers is developed. Following that, we study supercompactness in the absence of choice, and we analyze pseudo-ultrapowers of models of the axiom of determinateness and various infinite exponent partition relations. Relationships between pseudo-ultrapowers and forcing are also discussed.

Weakly compact cardinals in models of set theory

1985 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 476-486
Author(s):  
Ali Enayat
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Countable Model ◽  
Weakly Compact ◽  
Uncountable Cardinal ◽  
Power Set ◽  
Central Notion ◽  
Countable Compactness ◽  
Omitting Types ◽  
Models Of Set Theory ◽  
Generic Ultrapowers

The central notion of this paper is that of a κ-elementary end extension of a model of set theory. A model is said to be a κ-elementary end extension of a model of set theory if > and κ, which is a cardinal of , is end extended in the passage from to , i.e., enlarges κ without enlarging any of its members (see §0 for more detail). This notion was implicitly introduced by Scott in [Sco] and further studied by Keisler and Morley in [KM], Hutchinson in [H] and recently by the author in [E]. It is not hard to see that if has a κ-elementary end extension then κ must be regular in . Keisler and Morley [KM] noticed that this has a converse if is countable, i.e., if κ is a regular cardinal of a countable model then has a κ-elementary end extension. Later Hutchinson [H] refined this result by constructing κ-elementary end extensions 1 and 2 of an arbitrary countable model in which κ is a regular uncountable cardinal, such that 1 adds a least new element to κ while 2 adds no least new ordinal to κ. It is a folklore fact of model theory that the Keisler-Morley result gives soft and short proofs of countable compactness and abstract completeness (i.e. recursive enumera-bility of validities) of the logic L(Q), studied extensively in Keisler's [K2]; and Hutchinson's refinement does the same for stationary logic L(aa), studied by Barwise et al. in [BKM]. The proof of Keisler-Morley and that of Hutchinson make essential use of the countability of since they both rely on the Henkin-Orey omitting types theorem. As pointed out in [E, Theorem 2.12], one can prove these theorems using “generic” ultrapowers just utilizing the assumption of countability of the -power set of κ. The following result, appearing as Theorem 2.14 in [E], links the notion of κ-elementary end extension to that of measurability of κ. The proof using (b) is due to Matti Rubin.

scholarly journals Models of Set Theory in which Nonconstructible Reals First Appear at a Given Projective Level

Mathematics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 910 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimir Kanovei ◽  
Vassily Lyubetsky
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limit ◽  
Set Theory ◽  
Generic Extension ◽  
Projective Class ◽  
Almost Disjoint ◽  
Projective Hierarchy ◽  
Models Of Set Theory

Models of set theory are defined, in which nonconstructible reals first appear on a given level of the projective hierarchy. Our main results are as follows. Suppose that n ≥ 2 . Then: 1. If it holds in the constructible universe L that a ⊆ ω and a ∉ Σ n 1 ∪ Π n 1 , then there is a generic extension of L in which a ∈ Δ n + 1 1 but still a ∉ Σ n 1 ∪ Π n 1 , and moreover, any set x ⊆ ω , x ∈ Σ n 1 , is constructible and Σ n 1 in L . 2. There exists a generic extension L in which it is true that there is a nonconstructible Δ n + 1 1 set a ⊆ ω , but all Σ n 1 sets x ⊆ ω are constructible and even Σ n 1 in L , and in addition, V = L [ a ] in the extension. 3. There exists an generic extension of L in which there is a nonconstructible Σ n + 1 1 set a ⊆ ω , but all Δ n + 1 1 sets x ⊆ ω are constructible and Δ n + 1 1 in L . Thus, nonconstructible reals (here subsets of ω ) can first appear at a given lightface projective class strictly higher than Σ 2 1 , in an appropriate generic extension of L . The lower limit Σ 2 1 is motivated by the Shoenfield absoluteness theorem, which implies that all Σ 2 1 sets a ⊆ ω are constructible. Our methods are based on almost-disjoint forcing. We add a sufficient number of generic reals to L , which are very similar at a given projective level n but discernible at the next level n + 1 .

Elementary extensions of models of set theory

2000 ◽  
Vol 39 (7) ◽  
pp. 509-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Schmerl
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Models Of Set Theory

Subdifferentials in Boolean-valued models of set theory

1984 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 735-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. Kusraev ◽  
S. S. Kutateladze
Keyword(s):  
Set Theory ◽  
Models Of Set Theory
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document