Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T05:39:36.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Types omitted in uncountable models of arithmetic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Julia F. Knight
Julia F. Knight*
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , September 1975 , pp. 317 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Henkin, L., A generalization of the concept of ω-consistency, this Journal, vol. 19 (1954), pp. 183–196.Google Scholar
[2]Jockusch, C. G., Ramsey's theorem and recursion theory, this Journal, vol. 37 (1972), pp. 268–280.Google Scholar
[3]Keisler, H. J., Model theory for infinitary logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971.Google Scholar
[4]Knight, J. F., Complete types and the natural numbers, this Journal, vol. 38 (1973), pp. 413–415.Google Scholar
[5]Morley, M., Omitting classes of elements, The theory of models, Proceedings of the 1963 Symposium at Berkeley (Addison, , Henkin, , and Tarski, , Editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 265–273.Google Scholar
[6]Orey, S., On φ-consistency and related properties, this Journal, vol. 21 (1956), pp. 246–252.Google Scholar
[7]Specker, E., Ramsey's theorem does not hold in recursive set theory, Proceedings of the 1969 Logic Colloquium, (Gandy, and Yates, , Editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971, pp. 439–442.Google Scholar
[8]Yates, C. E. M., A note on arithmetical sets of indiscernibles, Proceedings of the 1969 Logic Colloquium (Gandy, and Yates, , Editors), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971, pp. 443–451.Google Scholar