E. Casari ( E d.

Aspects of Mathematical Logic

Lectures given at a Summer School of the Centro Internazionale Matematico Estivo (C.I.M.E.), held in Varenna (Como), Italy, September 9-17, 1968

C.I.M.E. Foundation c/o Dipartimento di Matematica U. Dini Viale Morgagni n. 67/a 50134 Firenze Italy cime@math.unifi.it

ISBN 978-3-642-11078-8 e-ISBN: 978-3-642-11080-1 DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-11080-1 Springer Heidelberg Dordrecht London New York

Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010 Reprint of the 1st ed. C.I.M.E., Ed. Cremonese, Roma 1969 With kind permission of C.I.M.E.

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer.com

CENTRO INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO (C. I. M. E. 3' Ciclo - Varenna dal 9 a1 17 Settembre 1968

OF MATHEMATICAL ~ ~

LOGIC^' ~

Coordinatore : Prof. E. C a s a r i

H. HERMES
D. KUREPA
A. MOSTOWSKI
A. ROBINSON

Basic notions and applications theory of decidability.

of the Pag. 1
'I

: :
:

On s e v e r a l continuum hypotheses. Models of set theory Problems and methods of model theory The general theory of semisets. Syntaktic models of the s e t theory.

55 65 181 267

"

A. SOCHOR - B. BALCAR :

"

C E N T R O INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO (C. I. M. E . )

H. H E R M E S

BASIC NOTIONS AND A P P L I C A T I O N S O F T H E THEORY O F DECIDABILITY

Corso tenuto a

Varenna dal 19 a1 17 Settembre 1968

BASIC NOTIONS AND APPLICATIONS O F THE THEORY O F DECIDABILITY by

H. Hermes
P r e l i m i n a r y Remarks.

( F r e i b u r g r Germany)

The f i r s t t h r e e l e c t u r e s contain an exposition of the

fundamental concepts of some main t h e o r e m s of the theory of r e c u r s i v e functions. One of the m o r e difficult theorems of the theory of r e c u r s i v e functions i s FI-iedberg-Muxniks theorem which a s s e r t s the existence of non-trivial enumerable d e g r e e s . In L e c t u r e s 4 and 5 we prove this theorem, following the t r e a t -

ment given by Sacks, but s t r e s s i n g somewhat m o r e the combinatorial p a r t of the proof ( L e c t u r e 4). Lecture 6 deals with problems in the theory of

primitive r e c u r s i v e functions. As a typical example of the application of the theory of recursitivy we give in L e c t u r e 7 in detail a proof for the unsolva-

bility of the domino problem in the simplest c a s e of the origin-restricted problem and ehow the in Lecture

how the domino problem i s connected with

c a s e of the Entscheidungsproblem. Lecture 6 has been given before L e c t u r e s

4 and 5. The inter-

change is due to systematical reasons. The interdependece of the l e c t u r e s may be indicated a s follows: 1 2
3

5 , 2

6 , 2

8.

Contents L e c t u r e 1: Computability, Enumerability, Decidability L e c t u r e 2:

- Recursiveness, Turing Machines, Degrees of Unsolvability

Lecture 3: Kleenesl Normal F o r m Theorem; the Jump Operator Lecture 4: Theorem of ~ r i e d b e r ~ - M u g n i k ,a r t I P Lecture 5: Theorem of Friedberg- Mucnlk, P a r t I1 Lecture 6: Primitive Recursive Functions Lecture 7: The Domino P r o b l e m Lecture 8: AvA- Case of the Decision Problem of Predicate Calculus. Bibliography

v .

H; Hermes
L e c t u r e 1: C o m p u t a b i l i t y Enuii~erability,becidability

1. Algorithmic procedures and calculi always have been a n essential part of mathematics. In the l a s t thirty o r forty y e a r s a theory has been developed in o r d e r t o study the fundamental notions which a r e connected with this part of mathematics. Everybody knows algorithmic procedures for computing the sum of two decimals. The existence of such procedllres shows that the sum-function is a computable function. we may generate If a mathematical theory T is given based on a finite number of axioms and on the r u l e s of first-order logic calculus, one by one the theorems of T. Hence the s e t of theorems of T is' a generable set. Using lexicographical principles it is possible co get nd theorems in a sequence, s o that we may speak of the (Ith, lst, 2 ,

...

theorem of T. In this way we get an (effective) enumeration of T, and we call T an enumerable set. The notions of generability and enumerability may be identified. F o r any natural number it is decidable whether it is a prime o r not. Hence the set of p r i m e s is called a decidable set. The concepts of computability, enumerability and decidability a r e narrowly related (cf.no.4). In order to be able to develop a mathematical

theory concerned with these notions it is necessary to replace intuitive concepts by p r e c i s e mathematically defined concepts. F o r each of these concepts different definitions have been proposed and proved to be equivalent t o each other. Practically everybody is convinced that the precise notions correspond llexactlyllt o the intuitive concepts. This fact, the so-called Church's Thesis (1936), may be compared with the statement that there exists no perpetuum motiile. In the following (cf. no. 5 , 6 , 8 and Lecture 2 ) we give several p r e c i s e concepts which lead to definitions of enumerability and computability. Referring to such definitions we have notions like Turing-computability, recursir veness,

/u,-recursiveness

etc. But since these concepts can be proved to be

extensionally equivalent, we l a t e r on may interchange them arbitrarily.

H. Hermes
2. In o r d e r t o compute (calculate) it is necessary t o manipulate objects, i.e. to t r e a t objects by manual means. Not every s e t S can be used in this way S has the property that every element of ch1 s e t of r e a l numbers). (e.g. the classi-

A s e t of objects which can be used for computa-

tion may be called a s e t of manipulable objects. Typical example f o r manipulable objects a r e the words composed of l e t t e r s from a given finite alphabet A. If A h a s only one element, these words may be identified with the natural numbers. An infinite s e t If S of manipulable objects is denumerable. S1 and S a r e two (infinite) s e t s of manipulable objects t h e r e exists 2 a 1 1 mapping f from S onto S which is effective in both ways, 1 2 i.e. : if any x S is given it is possible t o compute f(x), and if any 1 1 f (y) Such a mapping is often y S2 is given it is possible to compute

called a ~'ddelization,especially if bers

S coincides with the s e t of natural num2 (in this c a s e f(x) is called the Gtidel number of x). In principle it (infinite) s e t of manipulable objects the theory is choose for this purpose the set

is irrelevant on which

based. Very often (following Gb'del) we a r e chosen. fixed s e t

of natural numbers. But many applications may be much e a s i e r if other s e t s

- We

speak of an enumerable o r of a decidable s e t S

only if a

St of manipulable objects is given and if

=St.

3. F o r most questions concerning computability if is irreleveant whether we consider 1-place o r n-place functions ( o r similarly 1-place o r nplace predicates). L e t us consider e.g. n=2 t h e r e exist computable functions CS 2, (1.1) (1.2) (1.3) d 2 ( 6)21(~)s %(x)) d2(x9~)) GZ2(g 2 ( % Y)) =
= =

. It

may be easily shown that S.t.

d21s &22,

for each natural number x for each p a i r x, y of natural numbers

x
Y

Using these functions we may associate with e v e r y 2-place functionj f a 1- place function g, defined by

H. Hermes

(1.4)

Now we get (1.5) As place (1.6) f(x,y)

=

g( 6'2(x, Y))

.
a r e concerned we may re-

f a r a s questions of computability

f by g. 4. The following statements hold intuitively: A s e t i s enumerable i f f it i s void o r the range of a computable function.

(1.7) (1.8) (1.9)

1-place function is computable, iff S

the

2-place relation

R is

enumerable, where R holds for y and x iff y=f(x). A set A set

is decidable iff S and i t s complement a r e enumerable.
0 or

S is decidable iff i t s characteristic function f i s computable.

1 according a s x ES or x 4 S.

f (x) has the value

5. Here and in no. a finite ments of alphabet.

6 we give two definitions of the notion of enu-

merability. Here we a r e concerned with s e t s whose elements a r e words over Let be given four mutually disjoint alphabets A, B, C, D. The eleA a r e called constants, the elements of
D =

B variables, the elements

nl 1 A called proper words, .,tn p 1' 2'"" etc. a r e called

of C predicates. With each predicate i s associated a natural number a s i t s place number. the words over a r e t e r m s , then formulae. AvB Ptl;,

);

t e r m s . If P is an n-place predicate and t

,*.

The words over

. .;t n

is called an atomic formula. If p

a r e atomic formulas, then the words pl, pl+p 2, by substituting a proper word for a variable, atomic formula p system derivable Rule relation and a formula p+F system (Smulyan) is given by a finite s e t in a formul:

p14p2w3 Rule 2

Rule 1 p e r m i t s the transition from a formula t o the Formula

F to a formula G

the transition from an

F. A formal

4 of formulae. A formula is
@.
An n-place

, if it can be obtained by applications of

alphabet A is enumerabld (in the sen.

1 and/ o r Rule 2, starting with the elements of

R between words over a finite

H. Hermes

s e of Smullyan) iff there i s a formal system

A, B, C, D, where A
n-tuple w ble in

A, and a n n-place predicate P, s. t. for each

@,

belonging to the alphabets .;w is deriva-

w of words over 1'"" n iff R holds for w1,

...,

A the formula Pw o w n

6. Another way to define enumerable relations is given by F i t c h f s

minimal logic. We s t a r t with obtained, starting with words a and b

the 3-letter alphabet

4 ( , ),*) . A

word over

this alphabet is called a n expression if it coincides with i , o r if it may

;W.

, by the rule which permits to go over from

(a, b).

to the word

(r (*+))

is an example for an expres-

sion. Take the s e t of all

expressions a s the underlying s e t of manipulable

objects. We choose certain expressions and call them = 12, 13,. (1.10)

,4
=,

,/\,V,V,

11, 11:

.. .

With these expressions a r e connected certain rules. We confiv,

ne ourselves h e r e to indicate the r u l e s connected with

V, and

F o r each expression a we may write down the expression = a a ( t h i s

is an abbreviation for ((=a)a) (parentheses to the left, also in the

following). (1.11) F o r a l l expressions (1.12) F o r all expressions a, b a, b we may go over from a t o we may go over from we may go over from ab to Vab Va. the r e -

b to v a b .

(1.13) F o r all expressions a b sult of substituting c llabc

(1.14) F o r a l l expressions a, b, c, d, where for

a is variable, and d

a in b, we may go over from d to "minimal logicm.) An

.
if it can be obtained by the rules. E.g. the
(vV)

(These rules a r e s i m i l a r to r u l e s of logic, hence expression is called (lerivable derivation T r

(w

(d), (Vjt),V\/) dhows, that

is al,

is derivable

.A

relation

between expressions

(Fitch-) enumerable iff there i s an expression

s. t.

f o r each n-tuple

r a l . . . a n i s derivable iff

...,a n
holds

of expressions, for

the expression

.. , a n .

H. Hermes

7.

The l a s t example shows that the enumerable s e t s (of expressions)

a r e manipulable themselves, because they may be given by expressions, and each expression determines such an enumerable set. Unfortunately we do not have this pleasant fact for the computable functions. In o r d e r to show this l e t us assume that we have an enumerable set s . t . (a) each element of ctinn and that the elemets of n
S S

of words computable fun-

determines effectively a unary

(b) each such function may be given in this way (think of being descriptions of the computing processes). Then we a s follows : We get in a effective way for each

get a contradiction

We introfn duce a new function f by postulating that f(n) = f (n)+l. According to n our assumptions t h e r e is a n m s.t. f=f This leads to a contradiction m' for the argument m (A diagonal argument of this kind is often used in

a prescription how t o compute a certain unary function

the theory of recursive functions). It is possible t o remedy this defect by enlarging the s e t of functions hitherto considered. Until now we only have admitted total functions. n-ary total function consists of all n-typles of objects n-ary The domain of an

in question. We now consider partial functions. The domain of an have all

total function consists of an n-ary partial Tunction does not necessarily n-tuples a s elements, it may even be void. Intuitively a partial function is called computable, if there is a procedure which terminates for a given argument iff the function has a value for this argument which determines in that c a s e that value. With partial function we do not get the contradiction of no.
is only possible to conclude that

7 . It
h.

f is not defined f o r the argument

If we admit a l s o partial functions, the statement true. (1.6) may be simplified : (1.15)

(1.7) remains

A s e t is enumerable iff it is the range (or the domain) of a computable partial. function.

H. Hermes

8. There a r e different important p r e c i s e

definitions for computabili-

ty

for partial functions. F o r Turing-computability and

/1L. -recursivity

cf.

Lecture 2.

Here we mention only the concept of Markovfs algorithm. and words A 1 B. ( i = l , ., 1

Let be given a finite alphabet A A Markovfs algorithm

...,p) over A.

i s given by sequence

where "(. )I1 indicates that t h e r e niay be a dot behind the arrow o r not. (1.16) determines a unary partial function. f mine uniquely a sequence

. The domain

and range of f W over words.

a r e con-

tained in the s e t of all words over A. F o r any word w=w(O), ~ ( l ) w ( ~ ) , ,

A we deter-

... of

f is defined

iff the sequence terminates, and in that case the sequence..

f(W) is the l a s t element of

If w ( ~ + ' ) is defined we will have a uniquely determined number ( l < ~ , + ~ < p )which describes in the sequence (1.16) the rule which , responsible for the transition from We call a word K a w ( ~ to )

w ( ~ + ' ).

is

part of L iff t h e r e a r e words K1, K2 S. t.

L=K KK Given K, there may be different decompositions of L of this 1 2' kind. If K has minimal length, the decomposition of L is uniquely deter1 mined and called the normal decomposition.We now procede to define w ( ~ + ' ) and p n+l ' w(n+l) and pn+l a r e only defined if there i s

an i s. t.

A . is a part
1

n=O o r (n>O and the pth t e r m of (1.16) has no dot ) In n this case let be p the smallest i, 5.t. A. i s a part of w ( ~ ) Let be n+ 1 w ( ~ ) = K K the normal decomposition of W(') relative to Ai. Now W(n+ll A l i 2 = K1 BiKZ. of w ( ~ )and if

A unary partial function &whose domain and range i s contained in

the s e t of dl words over a finite slphabet) is called computable by a Markovls algorithm over an alphabet A, iff
A CA and if for each word
0

- 10 H. Hermes
over A (a) if f (the function determined by this algorithm) is defined f o r W
0

if

f(W) is a word over A g is defined for

0'

then g is is defined for W and g(W)=f(W), and then also f is defined f o r W and again f(W)=

(b) if =g(W).

R E F E R E N C E S: ------------

Davis. [l], of Fitch). Kleene lyan

Hermes [23

[I,

(also f o r the minimal logic Rogers

111 ,

117

Markov [I],

[I) , Smul-

-------we--

L e ct u r e
1.

2:

+-Recursiveness, Enumerability, ......................

Decidability.

In no. 1 we use natural numbers a s manipulable objects. Let be 1 the 0-place function with value 0, S the 1-place successor-function and n U. the n-ary function whose value coincide with the i-th argument 1 O l n (i = 1, ,n). The functions Co, S , U. a r e called initial functions. The

...

initial functions a r e computable total functions. The process of substitution leads from function a function f = g(h (2.1) g, hl,

..., hr t o

1" '"

h ),

f(xl,

....x,)

where = g(hl(xl,

...,xr ), ..., hr(xl. ...,xn)) .

Substitution p r e s e r v e s totality and computability. The process of primitive recursion leads from functions g, h t o a function f, where (2.2) f(xl..

..,xn ' 0) = g(xl.. . ., xn),

H. Hermes

Primitive recursion preserves totality and computability. The process of application of the tion g to a function f, where

r-

operator leads from a

func-

( p y = the l e a s t s.t. for all

z

y. p y

g(xl,.

/IC

..., xn,y) = 0; in this

..,xn, z)
Rxl.. .xny

<y

g(xl,.

..,xn,z)

..,xn,y) = 0
y g(xl,.

is defined iff

t h e r e is a

is defined and

0 and if g(x

case y =

..,xn,y)=O.

Application of the

la***

operator p r e s e r v e s computability but in general not totality. Computabibe defined for z < y.

lity would not generally be preserved if we would not postulate that g(xl,. ~ h e p - o p e r a t o rmay a l s o be applied to a relation R. We define function of R. The functions which may be obtained starting with the initial functions and using substitution and primitive recursion a r e called primitive r e c u r s i v e functions. If we admit in addition the application of the r a t o r we get the the computable
/ L

p y

by p y g(xl,.

..,xny ) = 0,

where

i s the characteristic

pope-

-recursive functions. Every primitive recursive fun, h - r e c u r s i v e functions coincide with

ction is total and computable. The which a r e not primitive recursive.

2. Turing machines.

(partial) functions. There a r e total

-recursive functions

A TM (Turing machine) ao,...,a

is given by (a)

a finite (ordered) alphabet states qO.

...,qp

, (b) a finite (ordered) s e t of N and a ffnite (ordered) s e t of quadruples. (The s e t

A quadruple is of the form (of the alphabet), and b a is a letter

of quadruples i s often called the table of M.) q a b ql, where q, q1 a r e states, either a l e t t e r o r one of the symbols

R ("right1' o r L (llleftll). (We assu-

H. H e r m e s

m e , t h a t t h e s e t of l e t t e r s , t h e s e t of s t a t e s a n d t h e s e t

R ,L

a r e mutually

d i s j o i n t . ) We r e q u i r e t h a t t h e r e i s a t m o s t one q u a d r u p l e i n t h e s e t of q u a d r u p l e s which b e g i n s with letter. A t a p e is a two-way infinite s e q u e n c e of s q u a r e s . ( S o m e t i m e s a l s o one-way infinite t a p e s a r e c o n s i d e r e d . ) An i n s c r i p t i o n the I

is a m a p p i n g of

qa,

where

is a fixed s t a t e a n d a is a f i x e d

s e t of s q u a r e s into t h e a l p h a b e t . We a s s u m e t h a t i n I loid letter a I

almost every

s q u a r e is b l a n k ( e m p t y ) , i . e . m a p p e d o n t h e c- -o n f i g u r a t i o n s c a-n n e d re with square C i s a triple

C = (I, s, q ) , w h e r e

A (complete) 0' is a n i n s c r i p t i o n , s is a

s q u a r e a n d q a s t a t e . We w r i t e C = (I(C), s ( C ) , q ( C ) ) of C, a n d

s ( C ) is c a l l e d t h e scanned squawhich b e g i n s

a ( C ) = I(C) ( s ( C ) ) t h e l e t t e r o n t h e

of C. C is c a l l e d t e r m i n a l , i f t h e r e is no q u a d r u p l e i n M q(C), a(C) C

figuration

. O t h e r w i s e we a s s o c i a t e with , c a l l e d t h e ---c e s s o r of C : suc

q(C) a(C) We put q 1 = q

C l e t be

i n a unique way a c o n q ( C ) a ( C ) b q* the

q u a d r u p l e of M which b e g i n s with C1 = ( I ' , s ,q l ) . two c a s e s :

(1) If

. We

want t o define We d i s t i n g u i s h

I' a n d s

depend o n b.

b e is a l e t t e r ,

we p u t s

s t = s a n d I1 = I w i t h t h e G o s s i b l e )
(left) n e i g h b o r of s a n d It = I.

exception

that I ' ( s l ) = b.

( 2 ) If b = R(L), s t is t h e r i g h t

If w e s t a r t with a n a r b i t r a r y quence s t a r t with C, C1, C v = (C1)I , C1I1,. C" m a y b e e x p r e s s e d

C,

w e o b t a i n in a unique way a s e m a y b e f i n i t e o r infinite. " T o

. ., w h i c h

a s t 1 t o a p p l y M o n I(C) i n s ( C ) " , if

q ( C ) = q O . I'To p r o c e e d f r o m we h a v e c a s e

C t o C1 Itmay b e e x p r e s s e d a s p r i n t i n g , i f (left), if we h a v e c a s e (2). I1M C, C:.

(I), a n d a s
C, a t

going t o r i g h t

h a l t s , s t a r t i n g with

c*"

means, that the sequence

..
n we

h a s a l a s t t e r m i n a l t e r m which is

C" M

.
and each natural numer f b . (We a s s u m e in t h e following

3 . With e a c h T u r i n g m a c h i n e
associate an n-ary partial function

H. H e r m e s

t h a t t h e a l p h a b e t of

h a s a t l e a s t t h e l e ~ ; e r - s a (blank) a n d a l . ) 0 M Let be x x natural n u m b e r s and a c o n f i g u r a t i o n with 1'"" n Cxl....,rn M M l(Cxl.. x ) a n inscription where the a r g u m e n t s q ( C x l . . . x n ) = q,, n

a r e r e p r e s e n t e d by s e q u e n c e s of (x + l ) , . . , ( x + l ) c o l ~ s c c u n 1 a and a r e s e p a r a t e d f r o m each other t i v e s q u a r e s which b e a r t h e l e t t e r 1 M ) i s the f i r s t s q u a r e on the tape by one blank s q u a r e , a n d s(Cxl. . x n which b e a r s t h e l e t t e r a F o r any configuration C l e t b e v (C) 1' ( t h e v a l u e of C) t h e n u m b e r s q u a r e s which b e a r t h e l e t t e r a 1 in I ( C ) x1,...,X

Now we i n t r o d u c e a
C*

f ,

a s follows:
x-

fi(xl,

. . ., x

) i s defined iff t h e r e i s

s.t. f&(xl,

M, s t a r t i n g with

cM

, halts at
f

*; i n

this Turing

case

.. .

computable

n if t h e r e i s

x ) = v(C )

. An

x ~ 9 * . *n1 x n - a r y function

i s called

a Turingmachine

s. t .

n f = f M'

4. R e l a t i v e c o m p u t a b i l i t y .

M a t h e m a t i c i a n s not only a r e i n t e r e s t e d f f is c o m p u t a b l e , but a l s o in

i n t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r a p a r t i a l function t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r a p a r t i a l function that s o m e o t h e r p a r t i a l function g

is c o m p u t a b l e if w e s u p p o s e (where iff

is c o m p u t a b l e

may is

b e c o m p u t a b l e o r not). T h i s q u e s t i o n h a s a p o s i t i v e a n s w e r a procedure t o get of t h e v a l u e s of f

there

under the assumption that the t h e v a l u e s of g are

values given

a r e given.

It i s not a s s u m e d t h a t If f

by a n y e f f e c t i v e p r o c e d u r e . that g is c o m p u t a b l e ,

is c o m p u t a b l e u n d e r
f f

the assumption to g or have

we c a l l

c o m p u t a b l e r e l a t i ve

g-computable g-recursive) and w r i t e 2 g ,< g f o r e v e r y function

,< g. A s

a n example we

f: .

A p r e c i s e definition f o r t h e r e l a t i o n
We have f

r u n s a s follows :

4g

fo'r e x a c t l y t h o s e f u n c t i o n s

which may b e obtained

H. H e r m e s

s t a r t i n g with the initial primitive r e c u r s i o n It is obvious that

functions (cf. no. 1) of

and
the

g , using

substitution,

and the application

p - operator.
.
Hence the relation de( p a r t i a l ) functions in mu-

& is reflexive and t r a n s i t i v e

fined by (f & g and g&f)

divides the c l a s s of all

tually disjoint s u b c l a s s e s . T h e s e c l a s s e s a r e called d e g r e e s (of unsolvabi-

Ilty). L e t be - the c l a s s t o which f

f

f belongs. It i s possible
D

t o define

<

g
D

by

f ( g.

Hence the s e t
0

of d e g r e e s

i s a partially o r d e r e d all (

set.

h a s a l e a s t element

which c o n s i s t s of

p-)r e c u r s i v e fun1955,

ctions.

Not in e v e r y d e g r e e we leave a total function (Medvedev

)

cf. R o g e r s [I]

D e g r e e s which have total functions a s e l e m e n t s a r e calA total d e g r e e may be identified with t h e s e t of a l l toT

l e d total d e g r e e s .

t a l functions belonging t o it. The s e t unary functions and bound of

5.

of total d e g r e e s i s not Let

only total

partially o r d e r e d but in addition a semi-upper-lattice: h(x, y) = d 2 ( f ( x ) , g(y)). Then with r e s p e c t to

be f, g

i s the l e a s t upper

f and g
1.f q a g

< .
f < g may be de-

i s a unary total function the relation

--

fined using a n extended concept quadruples guration If b

is

of T u r i n g machines. (cf. no. 2)

H e r e we admit a l s c .

b qt

where

b is a state a s s o c i a t e with

. If

a configuration

C is not t e r m i n a l C1 g begins with not

(no. 2) we

C a s i t s s u c c e s s o r a confi-

depending on g. C r i s determined by the quadruple which g q(C) , a (C) (cf. no. 2). L e t be q a b q' this quaduple. a s t a t e we define C' = C1 (no.2). If b = q" we define g qa = q t if g( G2l ( v ( ~ ) ) ) )= G 2Z(v(C),, and '

C1 = (I(C), s(C), qf ) w h e r e q9 = q n ask otherwise.

Cf one h a s in g e n e r a l t o g a n "oracle" (Turing) about the value of g f o r a c e r t a i n argument. With each Turing machine n (of the extendet kind), e a c h function

Hence in o r d e r t o get

g and

we a s s o c i a t e an n - a r y function f'" M, g' n The definition r u n s l i k e the definition of f M in no. 2, 3, but with

e a c h natural n u m b e r

in place of iff there

is

C'

.
Turing computable relative t o n (off the extended kind) s.t. f=f M, g

An n-ary (partial) function i s called a Turing machine

6.

It

is often convenient to identify a predicate (set, relation) with (which i s a total function). Hence we may speak

its characteristic function

of the degree of a relation and extend

<

to relations.

REFERENCES ------------- :

See

Lecture

1.

Lecture 3: Kleene's Normal F o r m Theorem; the Jump ............................................... 1, degree is not dl With each total degree (the j u m p of d) d it which has the property that

Operator,

i s possible to associate a d< of d' (but d' d' we in-

an upper neighbor

of d\. To prepare the definition

troduce Kleene's

normal form for

g-recursive total functions.

2.

In the following we a s s u m e that we have mutually disjoint infiao, a l , a 2 , .

nite seouences and s t a t e s of (which i s not

..

Bnd

qO, q l , q 2 , .

. .,

and that

the alphabets

any Turing machine a r e initial segments of these sequences a s e r i o u s restriction). A Turing machine
M (of the extended

H. Hermes

kind, cf. Lecture, figurations

no. 5) may be described by its Godel number sequences Co, C1,

G(M). of con-

We a s s u m e in addition that a l s o finite a r e described by

. . .,Cm

Giddel numbers

G(CO,

.. . ,Cm ).

The follo-

wing constructions depend on the (fixed) ~ b ' d e l i z a t i o n G. We want to introduce a unary total function (ni-2)-place predicate describe the function

and for each n an

T~ (which depends on a total function g) in o r d e r to g F (cf. also Lecture 2, nos. 2, 3 , 5 ) Let be M, g

the value (3.1) u(g) = 0 (3.2)

v(C ) i f t h e r e is a sequence of configurations m cO, 'm s.t . g = G ( c ~ , , c,),

...,

...

otherwise.

n T zx . x y iff there a r e a Turing machine M and configurations g l M , Cm), C = C CO, , Cm S. t. z = G(M), y $ G(CO, 0 Xl...X ' n C. = (C.)' depending on M) and Cm is terminal. 3+1 J g

..

.. .

...

Now we repeat the definition of

fn (Lecture 2, no. 5) by writing M, 2

This i s Kleenets Normal F o r m T h e o r - It shows that each n-ary sive function may be represented and by U ( ) ~ ~ T ~ .xny) .with X ~

g-recur-

suitable z.

It is e a s y (but somewhat tedious) to show that

U is a recursive function

T~ a g - r e c u r s i v e predicate (i. e. it-s characteristic function is g n g-recursive (g-computable)). F r o m this we infer that U ( p yTg zxl..
is an n-ary g-recursive (partial) function for every z. Hence,

.xny)

varying

the number

z = 0,1,2, of

.. .
g

we get e v e r y n-place g-recursive function.

In addition it can be shown that in o r d e r t o obtain r a c t e r i s t i c function

U and the cha-

Tn starting with the initial functions Bn'd t h e fun-

H. Hermes ctions g, (cfr. Lecture 2, no. 4) it is not necessary to apply the

r a t o r ( U and T~ areItg-primitive r e c u r s i v e f f ) Hence (3.3) shows that g we get every g-recursive function by applying the -operator at most once.

-Ope-

F o r l a t e r application it i s convenient to notice that

M, starting with

C :

, halts

iff

1 VYT G(M)xy g 21 and of

Finally we r e m a r k G(Co,

that for the usual choice of

. . ., C m )

we have

This shows that in o r d e r to check whether for g

T zxy holds o r not, the oracle g is asked' only for arguments which a r e l e s s than y

3. (3.5)

F o r each total unary function

we define

1 g' = characteristic function of the unary predicate VyT xxy. g We want to show that (3.6) (3.7) (3.8) Using (3: 6), (3.7), (3.8)
f

g < gf

>

- # - (hence g g1

with (3.6) g < g1),

,< g 4 f t < g ' .

we may extend the operator '(jump) to elements
=

of T(tota1 degrees) by defining ( ) : I

(a.follows that It

d < df

4. We obtain

(3.7) by proving (Church) :

H. H e r m e s

Otherwise let be g t (3.10)

g.

We introduce a total function h by

h(x) =

U ( p T g x x y ) + l , if t h i s i s defined f o r x , 0 otherwise. we find h

i s g-computable Henee a c c o r d i n g 1 g t o no. 2 t h e r e is a n u m b e r s. t . h(x) = u ( r y ~ zxy) f o r e v e r y x. We 1 h ( z ) = U(/U y T zpy), which c o n t r a d i c t s ( 3 . 10). get a s a special case g 5. In o r d e r t o obtain (3.6) and ( 3 . 8 ) we p r o v e t h e following T h e o r e m (Kleene). L e t be g a u n a r y and t o t a l function, R a 2-place r e l a t i o n a n d r
s.t.

Under o u r a s s u m p t i o n

gt

<g

R < g. Then t h e r e i s a computable total u n a r y function (3.11) Proof: F o r each number V y ~ x iff y

VYT g

r(x) r(x) Y

.
is an arbitrary C2=

x i t i s p o s s i b l e t o c o n s t r u c t effectively a n e x C, M(x)
L

tended T M M(x) s . t .

s t a r t i n g with a sequence

n a t u r a l n u m b e r ) we get

co

ct

(where M(x)

c,

=(Co);:,

=(C )I of configurations s. t. t h e following s t a t e m e n t s hold : T h e r e 1g"" CM(x) i s a k s . t . I(C ) is void. F o r a n u m b e r k > k we have k 0 x, 0'

Using t h e a s s u m p t i o n not, t h e r e will be a whether halt. (3.12) Now l e t we infer: (3.13) be Rxl k

R
1

< g,

M now

"checkstt whether Ckl

RxO

o r not. If

> k o s.t.

M(x) - cx, 1

Now

M ttcheckstf

o r not, e t c .
s. t.

If t h e r e e x i s t s no y s. t. Rxy, M(x) will halt.

R x y , M(x) d o e s not

But if t h e r e a y

Hence we have

M(x) , s t a r t i n g with r ( x ) = G(Nl(x))

c ~ ( ,~ h a l t s iff ) t

Vy Rxy.

r i s a computable total function. F r o m (3.4)

1

~ ( x ) s t a r t i n g with c ~ ' ~ ) h a l t s iff , , t

VY T

G(M(x))) t y

H. Hermes
Comparing (3.12) and (3.13) we get (introducing r(x)) (3. 14) which gives (3. 11) for V y 'Rxy ; iff 1 V y T r(x)ty , g

t = r(x)

6. We now apply Kleenels Theorem in o r d e r t o prove (3.6) and (3.8). Proof of (3.6): We introduce R by postulating RxY It is obvious that ble total function (3.15) R< g r
iff

g ( G z l ( x ) ) = Gz2(x) A Y = Y. according to Kleene we have a computa-

. Hence
iff g(

s. t.

vy R x y
g < g l ( r ) , and trivially

V ~ T ' r(x)
g

r(x) y

.
Hence from (3.15) we

The left side i s equivalent t o obtain

c 2 1(x)) = 6/ 22 (x) . g

gl(r)

6 g1 .

Proof of (3.8) : L e t be f 6 g. We define Rxy by 1 Tf \< f < g. Using Kleenels theorem we have

Tf xxy

R \< g, since

. ~~:xxy y
which shows that f1 = g f ( r ) < g1

1 iff V ~ Tr ( x ) r ( x ) y g

.
T ' (lecture 2, no. 4) with the additional

7. studied.

The upper-semi-lattice

jump-operator i s a very cornplrex s t r u c t u r e which h a s been intensively

I want to mention only two results:

(1) Every countable partially ordered s e t i s imbeddable in

T.

H. Hermes the degrees of the form dl) coinci-

(2)

The complete degrees (e.g. de with the degrees

> -

0'.

8. Of special interest a r e the degrees of enumerable sets. These de-

g r e e s a r e called - enumerable degrees. About the enumerable degrees we -have the following elementary facts: (a) 0 i s an enumerable degree, since every decidable s e t belongs to 0 and every decidable s e t (b) where R R i s enumerable. Going back to the intruitive notion of enumerability it is easy

t o s e e that every enumerable s e t may be expressed in the form Vy Rxy,

is decidable. Conversely each s e t of this form with decidable

1 is enumerable. If is a computable total function (e.g. f = S ) then 1 1 Tf xxy i s decidable. Hence YyT xxy is enumerable. This shows that Y O 1 is an enumerable degree (cf. (3.5))

(c)

As we have s e e n

in

(b) , each enumerable s e t

S may be

expressed in the f o r m

V y Rxy with decidable R. Using Kleenets Theorem

(3.11) for a computable total unary function g, we obtain the result that degree of We have shown that S = g t ( r ) < g1 = 01.

0 and 0' a r e enumerable degrees and that for

---

every enumerable degree we have 0 < d < O t . Post (1944) has asked whether

- -

t h e r e a r e enumerable degrees other swered (positively) not before

then O , O 1 . This question has been an-

196617. Cf. Lecture 4 and 5.

R E F E R E N CES ------------ :

See Lecture

1.

- Kleene

and P o s t

[I]

, Post

ll]

H. H e r m e s

L e c t u r e 4: T h e o r e m of F r i e d b e r g - ~ u & n i k , .................................... P a r t

I
in t h e a f f i r m a t i v e t h e 0 and 0 ' (cf.

1. T h e F r i e d b e r g - M u c n i k T h e o r e m a n s w e r s question L e c t u r e 3, no. 8) t e a combinatorial

whether t h e r e a r e enumerable degrees besides

We follow t h e t r e a t m e n t of S a c k s who t r i e s t o s e p n r a part of t h e proof (which h e c a l l s " p r o r i t y method")

f r o m t h e r e s t which u s e s r e c u r s i v e concepts. T h i s l e c t u r e is devoted t o the combinatorial part. T h e p r o o f is finished i n t h e next l e c t u r e

. For

o t h e r p r o o f s cf. t h e r e f e r e n c e s . 2.
E, F, F'

T h e individuals c o n s i d e r e d h e r e a r e n a t u r a l n u m b e r s . u n a r y a n d H, D binary predicates, and g

Let be fun-

a total unary

ction (whose a r g u m e n t s and v a l u e s a r e n a t u r a l n u m b e r s ). t h e following a b b r e v i a t i o n s : (4.1) (4.2) (4.3) (4.4) (4.5)

(4.6)

We i n t r o d u c e

Lrs Ps

for for for for for for for

O<r<s A 7 F 1 r A Fr A ~ H r s Vr(gr)<g(s) A L r s A D r s ) , V r ( g ( r ) = g(s) A L r s ) , O<s A

TFI

1,

Qs

$) s k
sk

s A Fs

g(s)

= k,

Vr(r<s A

4rkA ~
,

H r s 1 4 Hrs),

@ (k)
p(k)
in

[s:

4 rk)
.

(4 7) T h e derivations Axioms: Al:

p:Y/sk]

t h i s l e c t u r e a r e b a s e d on t h e following

FsC)~ES

A2:
A3:

~ H r . s 1 A H r s --, D r s A y E s Hss +Es

H. Hermes

A7:

Hrs

Hrs 4 and are the

We f i r s t prove s e v e r a l lemmata. The most important a r e Lemma Lemma 5 which relate the predicates used to derive sets Axioms (k) and
6
C$

and

v . These lemmata
k

Lemmata 8 y(k)

and 9

which show that for each

a r e finite. This immediately leads to Lemma 10. other axiom) will be used 11. In the next lecture we apply only Lemmata

and 7, not used hitherto (and no

in o r d e r to derive Lemma 10 and 11.

3. Lemmata

1 to

5.

Lemma 1. Proof: Lemma 2: Proof: Lemma 3. Proof:

7-

4s k 47Es.
Axiom Axiom

1.

ysk--) 7 E s .

4 sk-

2.

+ss.

Lemma 1, Axiom

Lemma 4: Proof: and have

r <s

4 rk

3.

@ s k ->Vu(r<u<s
,Qs

/\ Y u k )
gives

F r o m @ s k we get -Qs(Lemma g ( r ) = g(s). Hence and F r (from u s.t.

1,Axiom 5). Using O r k L r s . Since we rk Hrs-1. F r o m Hrs-1 we fina Hru. This together

( p s k we have 0 < r < s, 7F1r

4 rk), we get

w e obtain ,Hrr

(Lemma 3 ) . Comparing -->Hrr

and

that t h e r e i s a number with @ r k gives

5:

yuk .

r < u < s,

1Hru-1

Lemma -

i(i<k A 4 s i )

H. H e r m e s P r o o f : U s i n g t h e definition of qrk,
7
'?+/$K

we h a v e a n u m b e r

r s. t .

r<s,

H r s - 1 , H r s . L e t b e i = g ( s ) . R e m e m b e r t h a t k = g ( r ) ( f r o m @-k). T h e n we h a v e g ( r ) = g ( s ) a n d

If we a s s u m e k~ we get a c o n t r a d i c t i o n :

L r s ( u s i n g 4 r k a n d 7 H r s - 1 ) . H e n c e we get Q s a n d , with Axiom 5, E s . But w e a l s o h a v e i E s by L e m m a 2. If we a s s u m e k<i we g e t a c o n t r a d i c t i o n : T h e n we h a v e g t r )

< g(s),

L r s ( a s a b o v e ) a n d D r s ( u s i n g A x i o m 2). Hence w e g e t Ps and (with A x i o m 4) E s . But h a v e i E s b y L e m m a 2.

1

< k. F r o m y s k we g e t 7 E s ( L e m m a 2), t h e n -,Ft s a n d Fs (Axiom 1). S i n c e 0 < s a n d g ( s ) = i we h a v e $ s i 7 4. L e m m a t a L e m m a 6. Proof: L e m m a 7. Proof; Lemma card 5.
6 t o 9.

Hence w e h a v e i

($ (k)

5
4

card y ( k ) + l between

.
H e n c e if be Hen-

According to L e m m a and @sk, also

t w o n u m b e r s r, s with s. t . p u k .

r < s,

( rk $

t h e r e is a n u m b e r u If $ ( k ) s

@ (k)

is infinite t h e n @(k) =

v ( k ) is infinite. with
0

is f i n i t e l e t . Yulk

1
a.

So,...,S

'j

< s <.
1

. .<
n
S

s n t

. Then

we h a v e n u m b e r s

s.t. s c u <S <U s U n o 1 1 2 2 U1....~u (k) + 1 - n + l = c a r d $(k). > ce card Lemma

,..., y'unk.

c a r d y ( k ) < 2k by induction: Let (a)

. . Hence
card
i

Proof

(0) is void (cf. L e m m a 5 )

y(0)< 2'

. (b)

Lemma

8 be true for all

< k. T h e n we h a v e

card fik) <

:-

iCk ick

c a r d @(d)(~emma 6) ( c a r d 2fl/(i)
2i

< < -

1) (Lemma 7)

2 ick

(induction h y p o t h e s i s )

<
L e m m a 9. Proof: L e m m a 10: o f : L e m m a 11: (1) (2)
(3)

zk .

H. H e r m e s

c a r d @ ( k ) & Zk L e m m a t a 7 , 8. Ak v u

A r /I

i (u<r A i - k-+@rilI7yri). <

T h e g i s t of L e m m a t a 8.9

is t h e fact that $(k)

and y ( k ) a r e

finite f o r e a c h

k. F r o m t h i s we i n f e r i m m e d i a t e l y L e t be g(s) = k ,
-F'

L e m m a 10.

s, 7 H s s - l ,
7y

u < s,

(4)
(5)

/\ r /\ i(u < r A i < k 4 l @ r i A

Ar(r

ri),

,<

u+qDrs)

Then we have

V r ( q r k 4 ,dm
Proof: F r o m a t t h e definition Axiom 6). H s s - 1 is excluded by (2). Ps b e r r , s. t .
i = g(r).

Hrm)

(4) we get f o r

r = s and i = k t h a t - j @ s k . Looking
Ps V Q s
V

(4.4) we find that TFS. Hence

H s s - 1 (by

c a n b e excluded a s follows: A s s u m e Ps. T h e n t h e r e is a num0 < r < s,

T h e n we h a v e Hence -,Dm

4ri. Now
F

F r

F
i

g(r) < g(s), Drs. Let b e Using (4) we g e t

= g ( r ) < g ( s ) = k.

\< u.

by (5), c o n t r a d i c t i n g D r s . Q s . By definition of Q w e have a n u m b e r r, lHrs-l, g(r) = g(s) = k

F

T h e r e f o r e w e have s.t. have 0 < r < s,

. For

this

r we

@ rk.

W e want t o show that ~ H r m f o r e v e r y rn.

We have and H r m .

~ H r s 1. Hence by Axiom

7 we h a v e - t H r m f o r m < s - 1.

If now H r m f o r s o m e m , we have a n u m b e r t h a t 7 H r m which c o n t r a d i c t s H r m . R e f e r e n c e s : F r i e d b e r g r17, Mucnik

m - 2 ~ 9 .s.t ~ H r m - 1

T h e r e f o r e w e would have q m k (by definition (4.5)). Now (4) s h o w s

rll , Lachlan Ll]

, S a c k s [I],

Shoenfield

H. H e r m e s

Lecture 5: T h e o r e m of F r i e d b e r - ~ u F n i k , P a r t I1 -----------------------g -----------1. We want t o s n o w t h a t t h e r e a r e e n u m e r a b l e d e g r e e s

do, d l , s . t .

do$' d l a n d dl&do. 0

Since for e v e r y enumerable d e g r e e

0

we h a v e

<

can be 0 o r Of. 1 In t h i s l e c t u r e e v e r y s e t ( r e l a t i o n , function) h a s n a t u r a l n u m b e r s a s

,< O f (cf. L e c t u r e 3, no. 8) n e i t h e r d n o r d

elements (arguments, values). Small l e t t e r s r e f e r t o natural numbers. F o r 0 1 0 e a c h s we w i l l d e f i n e s e t s A.s, A s t . t h e b i n a r y r e l a t i o n s x E . A and s S 1 a r e r e c u r s i v e ( i . e . d e c i d a b l e ) . Now we i n t r o d u c e t h e s e t s AO, A x&A1
S

by

F r o m the equivalence b l e (cf

x PA'

iff v s x e ~ : w e i n f e r s a m e holds f o r A
1

that

A0 is e n u m e r a -

. Lecture
Ts

3, no. 8)

. The
A'
S

T h e d e f i n i t i o n s of define s e t s

a n d A'

w i l l b e i n t e r r e l a t e d . We l a t e r o n

s.t.

x eTs

is a b i n a r y r e c u r s i v e r e l a t i o n a n d i n t r o d u c e

(5.2) 2. T h e s e t s a function viations:

CAO

s iff 2n E T s- I '

1 n A n iff 2 n t l e T s-1'

Ts

will b e d e f i n e d t o g e t h e r with s e t s

FS, HS a n d

g ( s ) by s i m u l t a n e o u s r e c u r s i o n . We i n t r o d u c e t h e following a b b r e -

FIS

for for for

F'

T ~ -, T~ j
O.

F f o r F' c T
s
D r s f o r H~

Hrs Es

B' n
T
S

n F'

j 0,

Ts-l

H.. H e r m s s

T h e d e f i n i t i o n s of

F' , H',

a n d g ( s ) a r e g i v e n by (5.6) f o r t h e c a s e

= 0. F o r t h e c a s e

s > O we d i s t i n g u i s h C a s e 1 w h e r e we h a v e t h e defi-

n i t i o n s (5.9), (5. 1 2 ) f o r (5. 14) (5.6)

(5. l o ) , (5.11) a n d C a s e 2 w h e r e we h a v e t h e definition

FS, H',

and g(s)

. In

both c a s e s

.
F
0

s is g i v e n by ( 5 . 1 3 ) a n d

= H

= T o = 0 (void s e t ) ,

g(0) = 0.

s- 1 In o r d e r t o define FS , H' and g ( s ) f o r s > O we s u p p o s e t h a t F , 1 A : a n d A' a r e g i v e n by a n d g(s-1) a r e defined. H e n c e a l s o 1 (5.2). Let b e f , f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f u n c t i o n s of A , : A:. L e t b e

(5.7)

~ ( s ) 0 =

if

s is e v e n ,

e ( s ) = 1 if s i s odd,
3 occuring in the pri-

(5.8)

e ( s ) = t h e n u m b e r of p r i m e f a c t o r s

m e n u m b e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of s. Consider t h e following condition ( w h e r e p is t h e kth p r i m e n u m b e r ) :

We h a v e be r(s)

C a s e 1 if (*) the greatest

is s a t i s f i e d , o t h e r w i s e

C a s e 2.

In C a s e 1 l e t

f o r which

V y (...)

T h e n we define :

H. H e r m e s

In C a s e 2 w e put (5.12) In both c a s e s l e t b e (5.13) (5.14) Here T s = Ts- l , of Ps V Q s V H s s - 1 ,

s S F = H =0,

g(s)=O.

Ts = Ts,l
P
and Q a r e introduced

F~ o t h e r w i s e .

b y (4. I), ( 4 . 2 ) , ( 4 . 3 ) , w h e r e F', F, H, D

a n d E a r e defined i n (5. 3), ( 5 . 4 ) , ( 5 . 5 ) . Using (5.13), (5.14) a n d (5.2) we g e t i m m e t i a t e l y

In t h e definition quantifiers i n (*)) ( e . g. V n ( n

of

F',

HS, T

a n d g ( s ) w e h a v e only r e s t r i c t e d

) ~. . i n (5.10) and V m V y ( m 5 s A y

5 s ...

In t h e t h e o r y of r e c u r s i v e functions i t is p r o v e d

that this fact

g u a r a n t e e s t h a t e v e r y t h i n g is r e c u r s i v e .

By i n s p e c t i n g (5.9), ( 5 . 1 0 ) a n d (5.12), (5. 13), (5.14) a n d (5. 2) we s e e

that (5. 16)

F h a s a t m o s t o n e e l e m e n t . H , T s A S a r e finite. ,
3. Connection with L e c t u r e 4. F i r s t we find t h a t

T h i s is t r i v i a l e x c e p t f o r C a s e 1. H e r e a c o m m o n e l e m e n t of F a n d m u s t b e both of t h e f o r m

HS

2 p + l - & ( s ) and 2n+ & ( s ) which i s i m p o s s i b l e .

H. H e r m e s

Using (5.18)

(5.4)

a n d t h e d e f i n ~ t i o nof

H'

it is e a s y t o v e r i f y t h a t

~ H S S 1. Axioms 1 to 7 ( L e c t u r e 4) a r e t r u e .

Now w e m a y c h e c k ( u s i n g 5. 17) t h a t H e n c e a l s o l e m m a t a 10 a n d

1 1 of L e c t u r e 4 hold.

4. We want t o s h o w t h a t A' (In a s i m i l a r way it c a n b e shown 1 1 ' t h a t A' A ) -- a s s u m e t h a t A - A a n d look f o r a c o n t r a d i c t i o n . We < 1 1 L e t b e fO, f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f u n c t i o n s of A' r e s p . A According to

j .

~'1

K l e e n e ( L e c t u r e 3 ) t h e r e is ( u n d e r o u r a s s u m p t i o n ) a n u m b e r e , s . t . (5: 19)
f ( x ) = U(

yT

exy)

.
we show t h e s a m e a s s u m i n g . 1 0 f o r A - A . T h e condition <

We now f o r m u l a t e a condition (5.20). In no. 5 we s h o w t h a t we g e t a c o n t r a d i c t i o n a s s u m i n g t h i s condition, a n d i n no. 6 the negation is a s (5.20) (5.20). This finishes t h e proof

follows: F o r each finite s e t L t h e r e is a n u m b e r s, s . t .

5 . We n e r e a s s u m e tc L e m m a

(5.19) a n d ( 5 . 2 0 )

. Let

b e k = 2e+l. According

10 ( L e c t u r e 4) t h e r e is a n u m b e r

u s.t.

L e t be

L is f i n i t e

. By

(5.20) we h a v e a n u m b e r

s. t .

(*+j

We now c h e c k t h e

- 29

H. H e r m e s

a s s u m p t i o n s of L e m m a 1 1 ( L e c t u r e 4). ( 1 ) g ( s ) = 2 e + l = k. ( 2 ) Hss H e n c e F' re u D r s , i. e .

F's by (4X),

-1
/
0.

by (5. 18). (3) S i n c e g ( s ) = 0 we h a v e s

If s - u t h e n <

L fI F 3 F

> 0 and --- s e 1. Ca

= 0 corltradicting

w). T h e r e f o -

< s. (4) is i d e n t i c a l w i t h
H

(5.21). ( 5 )

Let
S

be

fI F

r 5 u. 1:' we a s s u m e
r s. t.

0, we would h a v e

L fI F

0 in c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o

(++). H e n c e 7 D r s . q r k and that

- NOW L e m m a

11 shows that t h e r e i s a number

~ H r mo r e a c h m . f
r by

F o r e a s i e r reference we rename former s)

s (and f o r g e t about

the

.
@sk
g(s) = k a n d ~ H s mfor each
= 2e+l

H e n c e w e have : (5. 23) B y (5.23) we h a v e c e by (5. 11) by ( 5 . 9 )

rn.
C a s e 1. Hene ( s ) = e and

{ 0. We t h e r e f o r e h a v e
E ( s ) = 0,

g(s) = 2e(s)

+ &

(s)+l. That gives

where ber y (5.25)

r ( s ) i s determin2d a s

in

( 5 . 9 ) . A c c o r d i n g t o (*)

we h a v e a num-

s. t.
r(s)

5
s

s , y L by -

1 s , T f0

e per(S)y, U(y) = 1

H e r e we m a y r -------e p l a c e

f0

fO: In L e c t u r e 3 , no. 2 we h a v e m e n t i o n e d

that in o r d e r to check wh?ther

zxy holds o r n ~ t ,we h a v e l o a s k t h e g o r a c l e f o r g only f o r a r g u m e n t s which a r e l e s s t h a n y . In o u r c a s e we

f0
S

y - s . H e n c e i t i s sufficient t o show t h a t < me each -------v a l u e s f o r - x < s . have (a)

If f ( x ) = 0 t h e n we h a v e x
0

and

f0

h-a v e

the sa-

e AU s'

x e A O , cO(x) = 0

H. H e r m e s (b) n, 2x B T n wise let be If fO(x) = 0 by

0

A0 n ( 5 . 2 ) . We want t o show t h a t
X ~ A ; . Then

then

xe A , x

for a certain number fs(x) 2x H

S
0

= 0, if x

< - s.

Other-

fs(x) = 1. H e n c e

b y ( 5 . 1 0 ) . But t h e n

we would h a v e have: (5.26)

H' nTn-

4 0,
y

i. e . Hsn-

c o n t r a d i c t i n g (5. 23).

Hence we

r(s)

s.

5 s,

f0

e p) : "

y, ~ ( y = 1 )
= 1.

Now i n (a) w e d e r i v e fl(p:(s))

= 0, a n d i n (b) fl(pr(s))

( a ) We h a v e Fs ( f r o m $sk.

(5.23)), i. r . F'

C Ts,

hence fl(~~~(~))=0.

2 ~ ' ( ~ ) + C T s by (5.24). pe 1 e '(') A's+l (5.21, p( ) :S A', (b) F r o m ( 5 . 2 6 ) we get u(J.LyT1 e p;(s) y ) = 1 , h e n c e f0 f ( p S ) = 1 b y (5. 19)

6. We no!-assume a finite s e t
(*it+)

( 5 . 1 9 andetle_-n_etaJ&n_ of ( 5 . 2 0 ) . s. t . s(s

In t h i s c a s e we h a v e

> o ~ g ( s )= 2 e + l 4 1 s+ L ~ F ' # 0) ~
m 2p e + l

Let be

a number s . t .

We d e r i v e i n

i n (d) t h a t t h e a s s u m p t i o n

m pe E A 1 a l s o l e a d s t o a c o n t r a d i c t i o n . m ( c ) We a s s u m e t h a t p e e n 1 . H e n c e t h e r e i s a n u m b e r s 1 s . t .

is g r e a t e r t h e n e v e r y e l e m e n t of L. m ( c ) t h a t t h e a s s u m p t i o n p e~ A' l e a d s t o a c o n t r a d i c t i o n a n d

H. Hermes m 1

6 As

F r o m this we get 2p m

1 number

s > 0, s . t .

Since T = 0. t h e r e is a 0 1 S m ~ E T ~ - T ~ - T ~ - ~ . F ={zpe + l ? Hence This 2pe +i,sTs

shows that we have Case Now we have

>

( s ) = 0, e ( s ) = 0, g(s) = 2e+l. s 0, g(s) = 2e+l, 7 F ' s (because-F C Ts,,). Applying

l(no. 2),

and that

2 p . +1, the only element we get L Il FS f 0. But this cannot be since e s of F , i s not an element of L according. to the choice of m. d) We a s s u m e that

w)

pyl.
e T 1

Using (5.19) we get

e pmy and U(y) = 1. There i s a sefO quence of configurations Co, , Cn) Going through , Cn, s.f. y = G ( Co, this sequence, the T M with Gbdel number e has only a finite number Hence we have a number y

s. t.

.. .

. ..

of question

about the value of f

0

Hence in (5.27) we may replace f s ficiently large s. We may a s s u m e in addition that (5.28) Now we get from 6(s)=0, e(s)=e, (5.27) : m

a r e also given by

. For

sufficiently l a r g e
0

-s these values
by fs
0

with suf-

s , y L s.

This shows together with (5.28) that we nave Case 1 (no.2). Therefore thes + 1 = {2pr's)+1j, g ( s ) = r e exists a number r ( s ) 2 m, s. t . F e = 12pe(s) = 2e+l. We will show in a moment that - I F ' S . Now applying (ff*Y) we get

L~F'

2pr(s)+l, only element of F', cannot be an element of e F~ , cannot be a n element of L according to the choice of m , since 0. But

r ( s ) 1 m;

It remains to show that F ' s . Otherwise F

s- 1'

hence

H. H e r m e s

'('I + I , g T s - l Hence t h e r e is a n u m b e r q s. t. Z ~ ' ( ~ ) + ~ ETT '"e e 9 q-1' T h i s Leads t o .rq= )2p:(s)+l] Helice w e h a v e C a s e 1. w h ~ r e F q =

( q ) + ~ &(q)] B y c o m p a r i s o n we g e t 8 (q) = 1. r ( q ) = r ( s ) w h e n c e i 2 p e (q) (i. e . - - t P q c T g(q) = 2 e + l . Now we h a v e q .> 0 , g(q) = 2 e + l:lF1q ). q- 1 Applying (*k4 we get L n F~ # 0. But 2 ~ : ( ~ ) + 1 , f h e o n l y e l e m e n t of F~ , i s not arl e l e m e n t of

L.

R E F E R E N C S: ------ ------E-- S e e L e c t u r e 4.

Le \'i; r - t - e -- u r i v F u n - o n - -c-t u r-e- ---.-P- i-m i-i v- -R e c- -s- -e- - --c t i-- ? 1. In L e c t u r e 2 ,

no. I

the c l a s s

P -

of p v i m i t i v e r e c u r s i \ : r t'crn-

c t i o n s h a s been i n t r o d u c e d a s t h e s m a l l e s t c l a s s of ( t o t a l ) functions t o which 1 belong S a n d e v e r y vn and w h i c h is c l o s e d u n d e r s u b s t i t u t i o n a n d C : p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n . T h i s c l a s s i s a p r o p e r s u b c l a s s of t h e c l a s s o f a l l

r e c u r s i v e t o t a l f u n c t i o n s , a s h a s b e e n shown by A c k e r m a n n : t h e function d e fined by

H. Hermes

i s total and recursive, but not primitive recursive. The c l a s s of recursive functions i s not an a r b i t r a r y mathematical construction but has an llabsolutenmeaning, because it coincides with the c l a s s of computable functions. It i s not known whether the class of primitive recursive functions i s also *absolute11 in a s i m i l a r sense. The definition of P main depends on the c l a s s of natural numbers a s the underlying doobjects. We may a s k ourselves: what i s the mea-

D of manipulable

ning of primitive

recursivity for other c l a s s e s

of manipulable objects?

2. We may consider of operations:

P -

a s being generated by two different kinds

independent of the pecularities of N: To these open n rations belong the substitution, and every U. (a function U . may be considered a s a (2) 0 - a r y operation )

(1)

Operations

Operations depending on the pecularities of N: Here we have thf 0 1 0-ary operations C and S and the primitive recursion, which i s a bi0

nary

operation leading from functions f (cf. Lecture 2, no. 1)

g, h to a a functions g, h

to a

function

N may be considered a s arl absolute f r e e algebra of type < 0, 1 >, 1 : i s the 0-ary operation and S the unary operation. This inwhere C dicates immediately that for the Co and S'
0

a r e dependent on

N; the s a m e holds
C :

primitive recursion where in the f i r s t equation occurs 1 in the second equation S

. and

3 . How can we transfer: the notion of primitive recursivity of another

domain
D

D of manipulable objects ? Let be g a

to
N a s its

~ s d e l i z a t i o nwhich maps f which Itbenbelongstt to D, fg which

onto N.

Then we can associate with each (total) function g-transform a function

longsn

H. Hermes

by the following definition :

P a s the c l a s s of the g-transforms of the elements of P_ If -g we choose different GBdelizations g l , g2, the c l a s s e s P_gl and P may -g2 differ from each other.

We define

On the other hand we may use the processes (1) and imitate the p r o c e s s e s (2) (cf. no. 2) in a natural way, in order to get a class functions. We want to s a y that we have a satisfactor cept of primitive recursivity for a natural way and if there is a Godelization g s . t . As a f i r s t example for a satisfactory a finite alphabet y solution for the conD if it i s possible to introduce P = P -g -D'

functions which henceforth may be considered a s genuine primitive recursive

P-D

of

ED in

4.

solution we mention the (including the empty

class

of words over

{ ao, . . . ,a N l

c l a s s may be considered a s an absolute free algebra of 1 1 type 1>, where E i s the 0-ary operation, and So ' ' . . ' s N 1 a r e unary operations, defined by S .(w) = wa. (concatenation). In o r d e r to J E, So , ,S ; and define priimitate (0) we now select the functions

word E)

. This < 0,1,. . .,

1'

...

mitive recursion by the following N+2 equations:

A s s e r has proved that. we have a satisfactory solution by indicating an appropriate GBdelization.

H. H e r m e s
5. T h e e x p r e s s i o n s of

Fichts

m i n i m a l l o g i c (cf. L e c t u r e 1, no. 6) of type <0,2>, w h e r e we

m a y be considered a s an have t h e defined by expression as

absolute f r e e algebra

t h e 0 - a r y o p e r a t i o n a n d a b i n a r y o p e r a t i o n J,

J(x, y ) = (xy). H e r e w e h a v e t h e following p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n :

In a s i m i l a r way w e m a y p r o c e e d i n the c a s e of a n a r b i t r a r y a b s o l u t e f r e e a l g e b r a of type Mahn h a s 6. n >, w h e r e n a r e n a t u r a l n u m b e r s ( j = 1,. . ,r ) . 1'"" r j shown t h a t we have a s a t i s f a c t o r y solution in a l l t h e s e c a s e s . <n a

T h e r e a r e d o m a i n s of manipulable o b j e c t s whose e l e m e n t s i n
We c o n s i d e r two e x a m p l e s :

n a t u r a l way m a y b e c o n s i d e r e d a s finitely g e n e r a t e d but g e n e r a l l y not in a unique way. operation (a) T h e d o m a i n

0

of

"totally finite s e t s n i s g e n e r a t e d b y t h e and t h e u n a r y o p e r a t i o n

0-ary and

(empty s e t )

5
a ,
0

(unit s e t )

the binary operation

(union). of non-emptv w o r d s o v e r a finite alphabet

(b) T h e d o m a i n a ,...,aN
0

is g e n e r a t e d by t h e 0 - a r y o p e r a t i o n s

. .. , a N

(the e l e -

m e n t of t h e alphabet)

and t h e b i n a r y operation

(concatenation).

In t h e s e e x a m p l e s we have a dificulty with t h e p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n . T h e n a t u r a l way t o d e f i n e t h i s o p e r a t i o n e . g . following t h r e e equations: in c a s e (a) would b e b y t h e

H. H e r m e s

T h i s o p e r a t i o n p r o d u c e s a function f out of given f u n c t i o n s if --

g, h, k, k u t only

(6.9), (6.10). (6.11) a r e not c o n t r a d i c t o r y . Hence i n g e n e r a l t h e p r o c e s s

of p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n is only defined i n t h e c a s e w h e r e t h e " n a t u r a l e q u a t i o n s t f d o not involve a contradiction.

Rodding h a s s h o w n that we h a v e a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n in c a s e ( a ) . It is unknown to t h e a u t h o r w h e t h e r we h a v e a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n i n c a s e (b). 7. Tile next p a r a g r a p h s include t h e d i s c u s s i o n of s o m e h i e r a r c h i e s . H is a s e q u e n c e of

A ------- . a r c h yf o r a c l a s s hic.~
j the c l a s s

13..
1

(Sometimes

-J

1I.

i s a proper subclass
J

El, _HZ, gj+la n d H

_Ho,

.. . ,

S.

t. f o r e a c h

is t h e union of a l l

runs over

a s e g m e n t of

l l c o m p u t a b l e l to r d i n a l s ) .

One

of t h e b e s t known h i e r a r c h i e s

;.e f u n c t i o n s o v e r t h e d o m a i n
This we introdlice f u n c t i o n s

E f o r t h e c l a s s P_ of p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s l -n of n a t u r a l n u m b e r s is d u e t o G r z e g o r c z y k .

h i e r a r c h y according to Ritchie

m a y b e i n t r o d u c e d a s follows:

First

F. J

by postulating:

E of t h e G r z e g o r c z y k h i e r a r c h y is t h e s m a l l e s t c l a s s -n a n d which is c l o s e d u n d e r which c o n t a i n s t h e f u n c t i o n s c:. s', u, F n :

Now t h e n ' t h class
substitution and r e s t r i c t e d primitive r e c u r s i o n .

T h e o p e r a t i o n of r e s t r i c t e d

H. H e r m e s

p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n l e a d s f r o m t h r e e functions g, h, j t h e following t h r e e equations hold:

t o a function

f iff

E c o i n c i d e s with t h e c l a s s of e l e m e n t a r y functions which h a s b e e n -3 introduced by KalmBr-Czillag a s t h e s m a l l e s t c l a s s which c o n t a i n s t h e o n functions U . s u m , difference, product, x (greatest natural Co' 1 n u m b e r - x ) y ( g r e a t e s t n a t u r a l n u m b e r 5 x y if y { 0, 0 o t h e r w i s e ) , <

1 1 yI

se),

and is c l o s e d u n d e r

s u b s t i t u t i o n and t h e o p e r a t i o n s
0

and

n.
0

8. T h e

Grzgorczyk hierarchy for P -

may s e e m somewhat artificial

b e c a u s e i t depends o n t h e p r o c e s s of r e s t r i c t e d p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n . But it
is p r a c t i c a l l y i d e n t i c a l with a n o t h e r h i e r a r c h y

introduced by Heinermann and 0 1 which contains Co , S, e v e r y longing t o ved f o r Ritchie R-n- I substitution. If n and for

A x t. U :

En

R f o r P which h a s b e e n -n is t h e s m a l l e s t c l a s s of functions,

e v e r y f obtainable f r o m functions be-

b y one p r i m i t i v e r e c u r s i o n , a n d which is c l o s e d u n d e r is g r e a t enough we h a v e R

n > 6 by Meyer,

for

= This has been pro-n %+ 1. n > 5 by K. ROdding, f o r n > 4 b y D. M.

n - 3 by Scwichtenberg. >

9. R. W. R i t c h i e h a s p r e s e n t e d a h i e r a r c h y--F f o r the c l a s s of e l e m e n n 0 t a r y functions ( s e e no. 8) _F c a n b e t a k e n a s t h e c l a s s of a l l l i n e a r func-

( o r e l s e a s t h e c l a s s of 611 t o t a l functions which a r e I1cornputable by n+ 1 finite a u t o m a t a n ) . A function b e l o n g s t o F iff it i s total and r e c u r s i v e n s. t t h e a m o u n t h of t a p e which is u s e d f o r the a n d if t h e r e i s a function g E F computation of f(xl,

tions

. . . ,xn)

is bounded by

g(xl,

. . . , Xn) .

H. Hermes

Re fe r e nce s ---------- :

Asser

ill.

Hermes 127 , Mahn r l ] , P e t e r

[I]

(primitive r e c u r s i v e functions over different

Lz] , RBdding domains). Axt fi] ,

Ritchie [l]
,

Grzegorczyk [I) R. W. Ritchie

il] , [2]

, Heinermann

[ly

, Meyer I11 , D.M.

, Schwichtenberg

111

(hierarchies)

L e c t u r e V I I ; The Domino Problem ...........................

1. The proof of the Ifundecidability of the domino problem" i s a ty-

pical example f o r the application of the theory of r e c u r s i v e functions. The problem (cf. no. 3) h a s the advantage that it does not presuppose the knowledge of a mathematical theory. The fact that a special f o r m of the domino problem i s unsolvable has been related to the Decision P r o b l e m

(~fEntscheidungsproblem") of the f i r s t o r d e r logic calculus. In this way it

has been shown that ble (Lecture 8) problem for the

AvA-

c a s e of this Decision P r o b l e m i s

unsolva-

In no. 2 we show a s a preliminary s t e p that the halting i s unsolvable.

T Ms

2. The halting problem for Turing machines. compare Lecture

( F o r the terminology

2, no. 2.)

With r e g a r d to the intended application it T M s with a one-way infinite tape going

is convenient to use not extended

to the right. Hence the tape has an initial square. If we have a configuration

C=(I, s , q) where s is the initial s q u a r e , and if the quadruple q s l q f is an ele

ment of M we have to a l t e r the general prescription of Lecture 2, no. 2

by postulating that

i s terminal.

H. Hermes

We say that

Kt!

if M, applied on the void inscription in the starting with

initial square, stops after a finite number of steps. We say that M, applied on the number z, h_aKs_ if Pvl, number of steps. We want t o show briefly that the halting problem for cidable (i.e. that the s e t of TMs where M proceed by reductio TMs i s undeWe. halts, is not decidable).

C :

, stops after a finite

ad absurdum and assume that the halting problem i s M, applied on G(M)

decidable. Then it a l s o would be decidable whether t h e r e is

(7.1)

(GSdel number of M, under a given ~Edelizatinn), does not halt a TM Mo, s . t .

Hence

F o r every

M: M

0 '

applied on G(M), halts iff

M, applied on G(M),

does not halt. This leads immediately to a contradiction for M = Mo

3. Domino problems. A domino is an oriented square plate with

colors on each edge. A d ~ m i n omust not be rotated o r reflected. Two if the corresponding edges have the s a m e dominoes a r e of the s a m e --type a finite s e t D of domino types.

colors. (We sometimes confound dominoes with their types). Let be given

D i s called -good if it i s possible

to (see

fill the plane with dominoes who (i.e. whose types) belong to Fig. 1)

D , , in such

a way that adjacent edges have the s a m e colors (matching condition)

.
Fig. 1

H. Hermes
In the origin

- restricted

domino problem D,D

0

is given a finite s e t

DO

of

domino types. The p a i r c o r n e r domino belongs to

is called good if it is possible to fill D in such a way that the (main) diagonal we get

the (first) quadrant with dominoes belonging to

DO

and the macthing condition i s satisfied.

If in this definition we replace the c o r n e r by the the diagonal-restricted domino problem. In each of the domino problems and the diagonal-restricted) for
0

(the general, the origin-restricted

it may be questioned whether the property (1961) for the origin-restricted and want to give the proof f o r unde-

D (resp. D, D ) of being good is decidable. In each c a s e we have a

negative answer, which was given by Wang by B e r g e r (1966) f o r the general c a s e

case, by Kahr, Moore and Wang (1962) f o r the diagonal-restricted c a s e

. We

cidability in the origin-restricted c a s e in this lecture. In Lecture 8 s o m e r e m a r k s a r e included about the diagonal-restricted case, which easy. Even m o r e complicated i s the general case. 4. We want t o associate with each (one-way) TM M a finite s e t
DM of

is not s o

domino types and a (one-element) subset D

of DM s . t .

the fol-

lowing holds : (7.2) M does not halt iff DM, DM is good (for the origin-restricted c a s e ) . F r o m (7.2) we get immediately that the property of being good is undecidable. Let be given a o r d e r t o describe sidered 0.1,2 TM M (by i t s l e t t e r s , s t a t e s and its table). In
0

DM,

DL

we may suppose that the s t a t e s of the conO,1,2,.

TMs a r e given by numbers We have the following colors: a, qa, qR, qL, qaR,

.. and the

l e t t e r s by numbers

,... .
qaL, W, I, V and H ,

H. H e r m e s

w h e r e a r u n s through the l e t t e r s ,

q through t h e s t a t e s and R ( " r i g h t n ) , V(nvoidtt) and H(llhorizontaln)

C
=

L("leftn), W(nwestn), S(llsouthn), I(tlinitial",

a r e s p e c i a l s y m b o l s . Using t h e t a b l e of M we introduce a function defined a s follows:

qa = C(q, a ) (ltcolor functionl1) whose v a l u e s f o r given a r g u m e n t s q, a a r e c o l o r s

V ,

if

n o quadruple beginning with q a is i n M

T o the s e t

L7

belongs only one type, given by

Fig. -

( H e r e W, I, S. W

a r e t h e c o l o r s and

(K) ( t t K o r n e r t t )i s the n a m e of t h e dosubsequently).

mino. S i m i l a r l y f o r the o t h e r t y p e s t o b e defined T o the s e t

DM Selong ( b e s i d e s (K)) t h e following types ( w h e r e again

a r u n s through t h e l e t t e r s and q

through

the s t a t e s :

H. H e r m e s

Fig. 3 5. Hence P r o o f of (7.2 , F i r s t P a r t . )

I

We a s s u m e t h a t

M d o e s not h a l t .

we h a v e a n infinite s e q u e n c e of c o n f i g u r a t i o n s
= C

re C .

3+1 = 1, 2 3, ,

. . .)

and

C
0

Co' = (void i n s c r i p t i o n , f i r s t s q u a r e , 0). L e t b e B. ( j =

C1, C2,.. ., whe-

the behavior

( P ( " p r i n t ") o r R o r L ) which l e a d s f r o m C.

j with

. We s h o w

that D is good by defining a filing of t h e q u a d r a n t n, D L (K) in t h e c o r n e r a n d m a t c h i n g c o n d i t i o n s s a t i s f i e d by defining h o r i z o ~ 1 of d o m i n o e s

J- 1

to

tal s t r i p s

So) SC,Bl~.sC ' ' ' . 2 2

which a r e l a i d down o n e

H. H e r m e s

a b o v e t h e o t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o -Fig. 4 .

Fig. -4

Let be

a . .; q a n a r b i t r a r y configuration (where a a is o n o 1 "' t h e i n s c r i p t i o n , n . t h e n u m b e r of t h e s c a n n e d s q u a r e a n d q t h e s t a t e ) . Let be C = a Now we define

... .

( ( 7 . 6 ) is d e f i n e d only if

> 0.) Now a l l t h e c o n d i t i o n s a r e s a t i s t r i p satisfies the hori-

s f i e d : In t h e c o r n e r we h a v e d o m i n o (K). E v e r y i s s a t i s f i e d m u s t b e shown f o r
S

z o n t a l m a t c h i n g condition. T h a t a l s o t h e t h e v e r t i c a l m a t c h i n g condition and for CIBl 'C.B F o r t h e induction s t e p it i s c o n v e n i e n t t o u s e t h i

0

and S

cj+~ Bj+l tion, t h a t S the

and observa-

and S h a v e t h e s a m e u p p e r c o l o r s . We l e a v e C P ' 'CR CL details to. the r e a d e r .

H. H e r m e s
0

6.

Proo -f

of (7.2Q~cond

- Part. F

We a s s u m e t h a t

D M' DM

is

good. H e n c e to

we h a v e a c o r r e c t filling

of t h e q u a d r a n t . We now want

s h o w by induction o n t h e n a t u r a l n u m b e r j : (1) M, a p p l i e d o n t h e void steps. inscription in the initial square, p e r f o r m s

at least j (2) T h e (3) If

j t h ( h o r i z o n t a l ) s t r i p of

i s uniquely d e t e r m i n e d

C . = a ... a q i s t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n which w e h a v e a t e r J o n"' t h e j - th s t e p , t h e u p p e r c o l o r s of t h e j- th s t r i p of F a r e

We f i r s ---------- t (K).

a s s u m e t h a t j = 0. (1) is t r i v i a l . (2): We h a v e t o s t a r t with I a s i t s left

T h e r i g h t c o l o r of (K) is I. T h e only d o m i n o which h a s (K) m u s t h a v e (I) a s i t s r i g h t of

c o l o r is (I). Hence t h i s way of So.

n e i g h b o r . We find i n

that the initial s t r i p

i s So. We v e r i f y

( 3 ) by i n s p e c t i o n

We - s s u now a - -m e

t h a t ( I ) , (2), ( 3 L h o l d f o r j

. Let be

Now t h e p a i r q, a
(1) f o r j

d e t e r m i n e s t h e next b e h a v i o r of M. In o r d e r t o s h o w n 1, w e h a v e t o exlude t w o c a s e s , n a m e l y t h a t q u a d r u p l e in

(i) t h e is no

beginning with

qa,,

and that qa Lq' n

( i i ) n = 0 a n d t h e r e is a q u a d r u p l e in

hn

of t h e f o r m

(then C . would b e t e r m i n a l a c c o r d i n g t o no. 2). Exclusionof

of t h e

(i) : A c c o r d i n g t o t h e induction h y p o t h e s i s (3) t h e r e i s a d o m i n o s t r i p of

C

jt th

which In F

has

t o (7. 3) w e h a v e

= V.

qan s t r i p with lower color

a s its upper color. According qan t h e r e m u s t be a d o m i n o i n t h e ( j + l ) s t

C

V.

But t h e r e i s not d o m i n o a t a l l with

lower

H. Hermes

color V. Exclusio* (ii); Assume (ii). According to the induction hypothesis (3) the
= q f a L. 0 qao L a s its lower color. Inspection of Fig. 2 and Fig. 3

second domino 3f the jp!h s t r i p has C to (7.3) we have C strip c e qL of F. has q'a
0

a s i t s upper color According a Hence t f e second domino of the (j+l)st

shows that this domino i s

(qaoL). (qaoL) has

qL

as

its left color. Henthe (j+l) th s t r i p

must be the right color of lqa'

of the f i r s t domino in

We find that this domino must be

>a* L; (where a* i s open). The

lower color is W.

LJ i s
be

a*
a*

. Hence

the upper color of the f i r s t domino

of the jth s t r i p must

. But

by induction hypothesis (3) this color

This finishes the proof of (1) for j+l s t e p s printing

j+1. Hence M

performs a t

least

In o r d e r to show (2) and (3) for h+l we have t o distinguish three which begins with qa describes a going t o the left. In each c a s e we (j+l; s t s t r i p and going to the i s uniquely determined by the (2) and (3). The details a r e left

c a s e s whether the quadruple of M

o r a going t o the right o r a

find , starting with the f i r s t domino of the right, that each domina of this s t r i p of matching conditions. In this way we show to the reader.

Referenc s: --------e---

Wang

111 Buchi

, Kahr-Moore-Wang 117 , Rerger

ilf .

H. Hermes

Lecture

8:

AVA - C a s e o f t h e D e c i s i o n P r o b l e m of P r e d i -

c a t e -- C a l c u l u s . 1. A formula to check the

of predicate calculus i s called satisfiable if it has

a model. It has been proved by Church (1936) that there i s no algorithm satisfiability for a r b i t r a r y formulae (undecidability of the DeciOne may be interested in the s a m e question, where
t) J

sion Problem).

i s restricted to a subclass A of the c l a s s of all formulae. Among these subclasses those a r e of special interest which may be described by a prefix.

E.

2.

t b r e belong to the subclass AAv a l l I\x

formulae which

may be writ-

ten in the form

x, y , z

/\ y /\

I , where +

I.+

i s quantor-free

and has a t most

a s f r e e variables. F o r some of these subclasses satisfiability is de-

cidable, e. g. for V . .VA/\V. e.g. for AAV.!.

.. .

F o r others satisfiability is undecidable, unsettled. It was not Wang have proved that satisfiafact with the undecidabili-

F o r a long time the c a s e AV/7 was

before the y e a r 1962 that Kahr, Moore and ty whether

bility for/\VA is undecidable. They connected this

D, D

is good for the diagonal -restricted domino problem.

E a r l i e r (1961) ~ i i c h i with a method which he related t o the origin-restricted domino problem has shown that satisfiability for the undecidable. In this lecture we want to show by reduction to the resul of Lecture
7

qfi A \/A

-cas.e is

that satisfiability f o r the class

J 'A

VAv

i s undecidable and to indica-

t e how the

I\VA
P,

-case may be settled.

2. Let be given a class ble property to each object

(8. 1)

_O of manipulable objects and an undecidais associated in an effective way,

which

is defined for those objects. Let us assume that

s a formula s: P s
iff

s. t.

F o r all

(Qs i s satisfiable.

H. Hermes

This would be a proof of Church's

theorem that satisfiability i s undethe formula

cidable. Furthermore it could be that for every s a subclass A the theorem that a l s o for A In the following we domino s e t s D, and P D, D
0

ys belongs

of the c l a s s of a l l formulae. Then (8.1) satisfiability i s undecidable. choose

0

would lead to

O_

a s the c l a s s of all p a i r s of (finite)

where D

has exactly one element and i s included in shown that

P
0

a s the property of beidg good for the origin-restricted c a s e , In

is undecidable.

the preceding lecture we have

We want to associate with e v e r y

is

not

yet the definitive formula

0

YD, DO we a r e interested i n ) , s. t.:

D, D a formula

(which

(8.2)

D, D is good for the origin-restricted c a s e iff

'D, Do y

i s sati-

sfiable D,
DO

is defined a s the conjunction of formulae (8.3),

D = idl,.

. . .,( 8.9).

We a s s u m e that given by

..,dN],
., c M

DO

= [dl]

, that the r u l o r s of
dn are

the dominoes a r e numerated

cl,..

and that the colors of

9.5:

Fig. 5

The formciIae (8.3),

. . . ,(8.9)

a r e built up using the binary predicate sym-

H. Hermes bols bols

Dl,.
Z

. .,DN,

4 1 . .., 5 ,..., CM , . . . ,

4 CM , the unary predicate sym-

and a unary function symbol f. These formulae b e a r names whicl:

a r e explained in no. 3. Unicity condition f o r dominoes: .a\xA y v'!n Dn x y (V!nDn x y

is a n abbreviation f o r (D 1 xy y..

y DNxy)./\~(Dlxy~DZxy)

A t ( D 1 x y A D 3 ~ y ) . A . ..n - \ ( D N - l ~ y A DNxy). Hence V!nD nxy is quntor-free. vln.. may be read: there is exactly one n, s . t . .

..)

Unicity condition for colors:

AX/\ y

~ mCm x !

... ~

4 -~,4xAy~!m~~xy.

Domino color relations (cf. Fig. 5) : A X A ~ ( D ~ X Y . xyC ~. . + A.

1

1 4 (Here we have N formulae. )

nc;

xy)

(n=l..

. ..M

(8. 6)

Horizontal matching condition:

(8.7)

Vertical matching condition :

1 Ax Ay(Cm
XY

3 . 3 Cm xf(y))

(m=l,

...,M)

(8.8)

Origin Condition A x Ay(Zx A Z y

--t D1xy)

(8.9)

Existence of Z e r o

H. Hermes 3. Proof of (8.2). F i r s t P a r t . We assume that

'

D, Do is good.

We

want t o show that (8.9)) Cnoose a filling F

i s satisfiable. We get a model for of the quadrant

YD,Do

(i.e. the conjunction of the formulae (8. 3),

.. .,

in the following way : D, DO which meets all conditinns for the

' Y

origin-restricted case. Numerate the squares according to

2.6:

Fig. 6 -

Take the s e t of natural numbers a s the individual domain w . Related to w 1 4 N), C m , . Cm (m = 1, M) we now give to the symbols f, D (n = 1 , . n a meaning by the following stipulations:

. .,

. .,

...,

f(x) = s u c c e s s o r of x.

zx (8.12) (8. 13) D -nxy iff -m

iff

x i s the zero.

in

F on square (x, y) we have domino

dn

cP xy

(p=l,.

. ., 4 )

iff in F on s q u a r e (x, y) on edge p we have color the edges s e e (for the numerating oi F A . 5). valid: they express is satisfiable.

Under (8. lo),

.. . , (8.13)

all formulae (8.3),

. . .,(8.9) a r e
7'

exactly what i s indicated by their names. Hence

f D, Do

4. Proof of18.2). Second P a r t . We a s s u m e that

ble and want to show that Let be

i s satisfia+D. D O D, Do is good. Let be given a (non-empty, pos-

sible finite) individual domain w

g,;. . .

and a model of YD,DO over w. r associated with the predicate symbol D etc. the meaning n'
w s. t .

' '

by the model. (8.9) guarantees that there i s an element

z r
0

_Z z 0' Take one

H. H e r m e s

of t h o s e a n d c a l l it z

. Let

o b e - ( z0 ) = z 0 f

' -

;+I
'

i ( z0 )=f (f ( z )) (i=O, 1, 2, -

. . . ).
AN

We now i n d i c a t e a filling F of t h e q u a d r a n t b y d o m i n o e s d
0

(which d e p e n d s o n t h e c h o s e n m o d e l a n d o n z ): L e t b e (i, j) a n a r i b t r a r y s q u a r e of t h e q u a d r a n t (i, j=O, 1 , 2 , . r e is e x a c t l y o n e n u m b e r ne n

. . ). S i n c e o u r m o d e l s a t i s f i e s (8. 3) t h e (n = 1, . . ., N) s. t . D fi(z ) f J ( z ). We now defi-n-- 0 - 0

(with t h i s n) n F m e e t s e v e r y condition: o n s q u a r e (i, j). T h e v a l i d i t y of

b y t h e s t i p u l a t i o n t o put d o m i n o d checfi t h a t

It is now e a s y t o (8.8) g u a r a n t e e s

t h a t w e h a v e on (0, o ) t h e c o r n e r d o m i n o

t h e v a l i d i t y of (8.4) p i . s. t . C f (z )fJ(z ). T h e validity of ( 8 . 5 ) g u a r a n t e e s t h a t c is t h e c o l o r -m00 m of t h e p r t h e d g e of t h e d o m i n o d which i n F is o n s q u a r e (i, j).

. From dl w e i n f e r t h a t f o r e a c h i, j, p w e h a v e e x a c t l y o n e m
n

F i n a l l y t h e validity of
is s a t i s f i e d .

(8. 6)

and ( 8 . 7 ) show t h a t t h e m a t c h i n g condition

5. -..h e f o r m u l a T we s e e

If i n ( 8 . 8 ) we i n t e r c h a n g e Y D , DO i m m e d i a t e l y t h a t t h e r e is a q u a n t o r - f r e e f o r m u l a x, u, y,

and

exactly three f r e e variables

s. t .

TD, DO

with D, DO is equivalent t o

(where

'Ix) U

is a s u b s t i t u t i o n o p e r a t o r )

. Now

it is a well-known f a c t

("Skolem f u n c t i o n s f f )t h a t (8. 14) is s a t i s f i a b l e if a n d o n l y if

is s a t i s f i a b l e

. (8. 15)

c u l u s . We identify

yD,

(but not (8. 14) is a f o r m u l a of p u r e p r e d i c a t e c a l DO

with (8. 15). Now f r o m ( 8 . 2 )

we get

(8. 16)

D, Do

i s good f o r t h e o r i g i n - r e s t r i c t e d c a s e

iff s a t i s f i a b l e .

T h i s s h o w s t h a t s a t i s f i a b i l i t y f o r \Iv AV

/\

is undecidable.

H. H e r m e s

6. F i n a l r e m a r k s .

T h e r e i s no straightforward possibility t o omit V x Z x in A x V u 11 y

VA

i n (8. 15) (e. g. l e a v e out

by including

3(D,Do).

If we
i n no. (Wecould

would

( 8 . 9 ) we would not b e a b l e t o c a r r y out t h e p r o o f

4, s i n c e we would not b e s u r e t h a t t h e c o r n e r - c o n d i t i o n is m e t .

o m i t (8.8) and ( 8 . 9 ) a n d u s e t j r V y ~ l x y i n s t e a d . But t h e n a g a i n we would have existential quantifiers).

We c a n o v e r c o m e t h i s difficulty by r e p l a c i n g i n ( 8 . 2 ) t h e o r i g i n - r e s t r i c t e d c a s e by t h e diagonal r e s t r i c t e d c a s e s a r y condition t h a t f o r r e s t r i c t e d c a s e ) is elements, e.g. D

0

In o r d e r . t o h a v e t h e n e c e s 0

D, Do t h e p r o p e r t y of b e i n g good (in t h e d i a g o n a l D has several and (8.9)

undecidable, w e h a v e t o a d m i t , t h a t
=

) dl,.

. ., d p ) . Then

in p l a c e of ( 8 . 8 )

w e c a n u s e t h e f o r m u l a A x ( D xxV. . VD xx) which d e s c r i b e s t h e d i a g o n a l 1 P condition. T h i s f o r m u l a c a n b e m e r g e d into A x A u A y CXDlD0 ( c f . ( 8 . 1 5 ) ) , w h i c h s h o w s t h a t s a t i s f i a b i l i t y f o r / l v / j i s undecidable. Of c o u r s e t h i s p r o o f p r e s u p p o s e s t h a t b e f o r e h a n d t h e d i a g o n a l - r e s t r i c t e d c a s e is t r e a t e d , w h i c h is, a s i n d i c a t e d i n no. restricted case. T o conclude 1 , not a s e a s y a s t h e o r i g i n -

want t o m e n t i o n t h e e s s e n ! i a l i d e a s

(I),

( 2 ) which h a v e b e e n u s e d by K a h r , M o o r e and Wang (K-M-W)

( 1 ) In L e c t u r e 7, no. 5 we have represented represent

in this case.

b y t h e j t t h h o r i z o n t a l s t r i p . K-M-W

the jfth configuration C j C . b y the jlth diagonal

J

( c o n s i s t i n g of t h e s q u a r e s (i, i+j], i = 0, 1, 2 , . (2) In L e c t u r e 7

..) .

C. J i n t h e j t t h s t r i p . But t h e t o t a l i n f o r m a t i o n of t h i s i n s c r i p t i o n i s included e . g . i n t h e f i r s t 2j s q u a r e s of t h e [ape. K-M-W r e p r e s e n t only t h i s p a r t of t h e

we h a v e r e p r e s e n t e d t h e t-- i n s c r i p t i o n of otal i n s c r i p t i o n in t h e jxth diagonal, References: See L e c t u r e but t h e y r e p e a t t h i s p a r t p e r i o d i c a l l y .

7.

H. H e r m e s BIBLIOGRAPHY -------------A s s e r , G. Axt, P. B e r g e r , R. Buchi, J. R. D a v i s , M. F r i e d b e r g , R. M. R e k u r s i v e Wortfunktionen . Z e i t s c h r . f. m a t h . L o g i k und G r u n d l a g e n d e r Math. - (1960, 358-278. 6 I t e r a t i o n of P r i m i t i v e R e c u r s i o n . Z e i t s c h r . f. m a t h . L o g i k und G r u n d l a g e n d e r Math. 11 (1965). 253-255. T h e Undecidability of t h e D o m i n o P r o b l e m . M e m o i r s of t h e A m e r . Math. Soc. - (1966). 7 2 . p p . 66 T u r i n g - M a c h i n e s and t h e E n t s c h e i d u n g s p r o b l e m . Math. Ann. -- (1962), 201-213. 148 Computability a n d Unsolvability. McGraw-Mill, New Y o r k (1958). XXV + 210 pp. Two R e c u r s i v e l y E n u m e r a b l e S e t s of I n c o m p a r a b l e D e g r e e s of Unsolvability. P r o c . Nat. Acad. S c i . USA 4 3 (1957), 236-238.

G r z e g o r c z y k , A. H e i n e r m a n n , W.

S o m e C l a s s e s of R e c u r s i v e F u n c t i o n s , R o z p r a w y M a t e m a t y c z n e 4 (1953), 1 - 4 5

Untersuchungen bber die Rekursionszahlen r e k u r s i v e r Funktionen. D i s s e r t a t i o n M u n s t e r 1961. (Unpublished).

H e r m e s , H. H e r m e s , H.

1 E n u m e r a b i l i t y , Decidability, Computability. S p r i n g e r ~ e i d e l b e r g t ~ e w r k (1965). IX+245 pp. Yo

2 T h e Concept of C o n s t r u c t i v i t y . In: C o n s t r u c t i v e A s p e c t s of t h e F u n d a m e n t a l T h e o r e m of A l g e b r a . S y m p o s i u m IBM, Z u r i c h . Wiley a n d Sons . ( T o appear). Entscheidungsproblem reduced to the V w ~ a s e . P r o c . Nat. A c a d . S c i USA - (1962), 365-377. 48 I n t r o d u c t i o n t o M e t a m a t h e m a t i c s . North-Holland P u b l i s h i n g C o . , A m s t e r d a m (41964). X+550 p p . M a t h e m a t i c a l L o g i c . John Wiley a n d Sons, New Y o r k (1967). XI11398 pp. 1 T h e U p p e r S e m i - L a t t i c e of D e g r e e s of R e c u r s i v e Unsolvability. A n n a l s of Math. -52 (1954), 379-407. T h e p r i o r i t y Method I. Z e i t s c h r f. m a t h . L o g i k und G r u n d l a g e n d e r Math. 1 3 (1967), 1 - I ? .

K a h r , A. S . , M o o r e E . F. 1 a n d H. Wang Kleene, S. C. Kleene, S. C.

1

K l e e n e , S. C. a n d E . L . P o s t

L a c h l a n , A. H.

H. H e r m e s M a h n , F. K. P r i m i t i v - r e k u r s i v e Funktionen auf T e r m m e n g e n T o a p p e a r i n A r c h i v f. m a t h . Logik und Grundlagenf o r s c h u n g - (1969) 12 T h e o r y of A l g o r i t h m s . I s r a e l P r o g r a m f o r Scientific T r a n s l a t i o n s , J e r u s a l e m (1962). 444 pp. Depth of N e s t i n g and t h e G r z e g o r c z y k H i e r a r c h y . Notices of t h e A m e r Math. Soc. - (1965), 342. 12

Markov, A.A. M e y e r , A. R . ~ u g n i k ,A. A.

Solution of P o s t ' s Reduction P r o b l e m and S o m e O t h e r P r o b l e m s of t h e ' T h e o r y of A l g o r i t h m s I. A m e r . M a t l ~ . Soc. T r a n s l a t i o n s (2) 2 (1963), 197-215. R e k u r s i v e Funktionen. A k a d e m i e - V e r l a g , B e r l i n (21957). 278 pp. Uber die Verallgemeinerung d e r Theorie d e r redurs i v e n Funktionen f u r a b s t r a k t e Mengen g e e i g n e t e r S t r u k t u r a l s Definitionsbereiche. Acta Math. Hung. 12. (1961), 271-314. R e c u r s i v e l y E n u m e r a b l e S e t s of P o s i t i v e I n t e g e r s and t h e i r D e c i s i o n P r o b l e m s . Bull A m e r Math. Soc. 5 0 (1944), 284-316.

P e t e r , R. P e t e r , R.

Post, E.L.

Ritchie, D. M.

Complexity Classification of P r i m i t i v e R e c u r s i v e F u n c t i o n s b y t h e i r Machine P r o g r a m s . Notices of t h e A m e r . Math. Soc. 2 (1965), 343. C l a s s e s of p r e d i c t a b l y C o m p u t a b l e F u n c t i o n s . T r a n s a c t i o n s A m e r . Math. Soc. 1 2 (InrjQ), 139- 173. C l a s s e s of R e c u r s i v e F u n c t i o n s B a s e d o n A c k e r m a n n ' s Function. P a c i f i c J o u r n a l of Math. 1 5 (1965), 1027-1041. P r i m i t i v - r e k u r s i v e Funktionen Gber e i n e m B e r e i c h endli~her Mengen. A r c h i v f. math. Log. und Grundl a g e n f o r s c h u n g 10 (1967), 13-29. T h e o r y of R e c u r s i v e F u n c t i o n s a n d Effective Computability. McGraw-Hill, New Y o r k (1967). XIV+482 pp. D e g r e e s of Unsolvability. P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , P r i n c e t o n , N. J. (1963). IX+174 pp.

Ritchie, R. W. Ritchie, R. W.

Rodding, D.

R o g e r s Jr. H. Sacks, G.E.

H. H e r m e s

Schwichtenberg, H.

Rekursionszahlen und die Grzegorczyk-Hierarchie. To a p p e a r in Archiv f. math. Logik und GrundLagenforschung 1 2 (1969). Mathematical Logic. Addison-Wesley Publ. Co., Reading M a s s . (1967). VIII + 344 pp. Theory of F o r m a l S y s t e m s . P r i n c e t o r n University P r e s s , P r i n c e t o n (21961), XI+147 pp. Proving T h e o r e m s by P a t t e r n Recognition 11. Bell S y s t e m Technical J o u r n a l 40 (1961), 1-42.

Shoenfield, J. R. Smullyan, R. M. Wang, F

1
1

C E N T R O INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO (C. I. M . E . )

Djurio

Kurepa

ON SEVERAL CONTINUUM HYPOTHESES

C o r s o t e n u t o a V a r e n n a ( C o m o ) dal 9 a1 1 7 s e t i e m b r e .

ON SEVERAL CONTINUUM HYPOTHESES by Djuro Kurepa (Beograd) 1. Continuum hypothesis. The classical Cantor's continuum hypothesis states that for infinite s e t S the cardinality of the s e t PS of a l l kS of every

the subsets of S. i. e.

is the immediate follower of the cardinality

1.1. Continuum problem. The general continuum problem consists t o evaluate the number k P s for any transfinite s e t S

.
the following:

2. Conditionned c o n t i ~ u u mproblem. The conditioned continuum a s k s 2.1 F o r any s e t S and any set property 2.2. 2.3. Determine the cardinality F o r what properties kP$ of

T, let

P,S

be the s e t of

all the subsets of S , each possessing the property Q

n;

TC is

f o r some cardinal numer ( s ) x. F o r each S and each property y b it makes s e n s e to put t o preceding problem. 2.4 In particular , S might be a structured se, e . g. ordered, a graph, a topblogical space, etc. and the property connected to the structured s e t 2.5. Examples. 2.5.1.
( ) 1 $ks)'

7C might b e a r also a character

.
X

If

5 %

means

"to be of cardinality 211, then P S denotes the system (2) equals S

of all

the 2-point-subsets of S; the cardinality of

and the question whether

- 58 -

D : Kurepa '
for every tran-

is linked t o the choice axiom, the identical relation x = x2

sfinite cardinality 2.5.2

being equivalent to the choice axiom (A. T a r s k i ) then for any topological space all F - s e t s of the space S
; in

.
S

If

m e a n s n to be closed", family P%S: = F(S) of e.g.

one has the

connexion t o kF(S) one h a s with

the problem of De Groot, a s

to whe-

t h e r this number is necessarily

a 2-power, i. e. of the form

2X ;

help of the continuum hypothesis the problem is settled by affirmati-

ve for every regular accessible aleph. 3. Cantor's continuum hypothesis. 3.1. In 1883 Cantor stated ([I] so far no t r a c e of a uproof"

, p. 192, 244) to have a proof for

proof was found. In 1925

( I ) 2kw0 = k i l ; Hilbert published of H i l b d t

I s .

Cantor's

of (1) ; but, the doubts on the c o r r e c t n e s s (Luzin in particular). One started to

'proof w e r e published

doubt on the provability 3.2.A system

of (1) (Luzin)

.
K. ~ E d e lel, 2) proved that in s o m e

great s u c c e s s was when of

C
3.3.

of axioms the adjunction

(1) will provoque no contradiction

provided in

itself

t h e r e is no contradiction. succeded in of (1) 1963 t o exhibit a model is

is

Finally, P. Cohen l l - 3 1 s e t s in

of a theory of 3.4. hold.

which the negation

holding. proved and one has

Consequently, the independence of (1) (1) holds and another one N(q)

a s e t theory in which
3.5. Function

in

which

(1) does not

.
O(

Now, if for e v e r y ordinal

we write

and if we do not a s s u m e

N(o) = 1 , what is the value

of

N( q ) ?

By

D. Kurepa

a Zermelo-Fraenkel theorem the number 3.6.

N(a)

is

not cofinal

to

wq
is

.
any

Therefore one might a s s u m e that in particular

N(o)

ordinal number 3.6.1. l1D1une facon peut

w
0 '

>o
In

and non cofinal

to

.
the following: nous croyons qulon non cofinal avec ou N(o) = l e

Kurepa [52] N(o) on

p. 657 hint

(8) we read N(o)

analogue en posant pour peut

z k W O = kw.

prendre en

nlimporte quel ordinal > o poser N(o)

= 1, wl

particulier,.

premier

ordinal inaccessiblen.

3.6.2 T. 1202 ,

. This
where an

assumption was proved by Easton analogous statement for strictly:

(cf. Mathias [I] and any D<' ord-+N

N(q)

formulated under be increasing end of by the statement

the assumption that the function of Easton

'5

(5)

is ord

(not necessarily

increasing )'

In

particular,

the following statement

(2ublished in [89] ,

98,p. 17 )3.6.3

is confirmed not to led to a contradiction: F o r every infinite cardinal n the number

. Hypothesis:

is the f i r s t inaccessible cardinal > n (I1 P e r ogni numero cardinale infin nito n, 2 6 il primo numero' inaccessibile >nn)

an

The function (3.5.1. ) was introduced in 1937 (cf. Kurepa C157 , formula (2))

.
is implied by the axiom of choi-

The existence of the function (3.5.1.) ce; probabljr ,the converse holds too. 3.6.4. Let n

Here is a s e r i e s of nice continuum hypotheses. be a natural number; '.then f o r every ordinal q one has

(the case n = l yields the Cantor's 3'. 6.5. A

general continuum

hypothesis)

,great variety of continuum hypotheses is obtained in the

D. Kurepa

following way:

F o r every ordinal number

l e t m(q)

be a positive integer; then

3.6.6.

Hypothesis. diadic ordinal mapping Ord -+

F o r el erg-

gp( .i'Jone h a s G{O,

Each

of the preceding continuum hypotheses in acceptable. 3 . 7 . On factorials.

n m let In
If

Fo" any ordinal (cardinal) number c>--'inal (cardinal) numbers m the dinallty ( 3 . 7 - 1.) F o r natursal Inirlgers w e have
,ar-dinal number of
11

be ? h e s e t of a l l the n

such

that

< n.

is defined a s

all

the permutations of

any s e t

S 3f

car-

, then f o r every transfinite cardinal n

.. . =

2n

a s well a s ( 3 . 7 . 3 . ') where P ( n ) denoiea the s e t of a l l uniform mappings

such

that

D. Kurepa

(3.7.5) T h e r e l a t i o n (3.7.3) nite cardinals (3.7.6.) What would yield (3.7.6.) n, if

o<S<n+o

,$

15.5 j

.
(3.7.1)

holds f o r e v e r y o r d i n a l n u m b e r . A s t o t r a n s f i w e r e holding, t h e r e would be by

(3.7.3)

an
for

= kP(n)

.
:

n=kw ? It would b e 1

contracting t h ~ :,ontinuurn identity and nal

4.

hypothesis. Ana?ogously, one p r o v e s t h a t t h e imply 2k% = 2k

i

(3.7.6. )

would

for every

ordinalO(>

wo,

i n p a r t i c u l a r that number

c ,>i, w h e r e

is

the f i r s t inaccessible

cardi-

.
.
If

Ordered sets 4.1.

is a n y o r d e r e d s e t

let all the d2generated subsets of

PD ( 0 ,

<

) be

t h e s e t of which

(O,<), i. e .
set

s u c h orles in

t h e c o m p a r a b i l i t y r e l a t i o n is t r a n s i t i v e ; the e m p t y

is c o n s i d e r e d a s d e g e n e r a t e d
( d - s u b s e t of s e t (2) (12) (I)), e.g. PO linearly and

. Of
by

course,

if

(1)

i s degenerated the

o r d e r e d o r a n antichain , t h e n

equals

the question concerning t h e c a r d i n a l i t y of

is exactly t h e continuum pyoblem.

4.2. We f o r m u l a t e d t h e following. t r e e (T, ,<) s a t i s f i e s

Q-hypothesis. E v e r y infinite

D. Kurepa

(Kurepa 161, p;133). 4.2.1.

Remark. Every finite t r e e and the empty t r e e satisfy the

of fact, if (T,,<) is any finite t r e e , then t h e r e is a

preceding inequality, As a matter chain that chain C in (T,

6)a s

well

as

an for has

antichain

in

(T,

,<!

suck

kC(resp. kA) be A* in (T, <)

> , k c * (resp. kA*)

every chain if kC< kA, is kPA Q(T)

C1 (antithen kA i. e. 2

. Certainly,

kc

kA >, kT;

( k ~ ) kT )I ~

< k PDT.
T Now, Q(T) By case such

. Since
the

PA C P D T , one

< kPDT

<

Therefore, the requested inequality that positive for integer kA 4 2 , 3 , 4 3 A, C kA

holding for e v e r y kA satisfies ( k ~ ) ~ <2

this relation is satisfied for

is satisfied a l s o a similar

kA=1, 5, 6 , . one

. . ... .On
proves

the other

hand,

a s one verifies directly. Q(T) for the

argument on permuting

kA < k c 4.3.

.
b. Let

Number

1s the number

b(O,<) reached in any

(1) ?

In

particular,

is the number

b(T, <) reached in 4.3.1.

t r e e (T,,<) ?

Ramification hypothesis
is

[ R

HI.
hypothesis and is 130, proposition i6)p.

The affirmative answer

called ramification

connected t o the general Suslin problem (v. Kurepa p1 : r73

.
The ramification hypothesis
is equivalent to the reduction

4.3.2.

principle f o r on p. 138)

t r e e s : E v e r y infinite t r e e has the s a m e cardinality a s one of it

degenerated subtrees (D. Kurepa

fi] p.

130 (Prof. P2); equivalence

. It

PPP2

is interesting that one h a s the following

D. Kurepa
4.4.

Theorem

. The .

identity is equivalent to the

(4.1) conjuction hypothesis of

kPD (T,Q = ( k ~ ) + for every infinite t r e e the general continuum

hypothesis and of the yamification

(Kurepa [92] ) the

In particular, infinite the set tree; on

GCH and the f o r non if (R;

RH

imply

Q(T)

for every Q(X) and

is

the contrary, the and if

t r e e s the equality W of and

C H

incompatible with

G C H ; e.g.
ordering and (kr)

is
R ,

any then

well

ordering of a

of in

reals the

6' )
W 2
KG

means

a c t b ea s b

preceds b

well

k PD(R, <I),<? imply

5.

the relation Q(W) would

2kW0 =

akwl

contradicting

the

.
every infinite t r e e .

Without

continuum

hypothesis we a r e not able to prove kPD(T, <) ,< (kT)

for

6.

If for

some ordinal o( satisfying (T,<) of cardinality

W one has
kwd we

N(Ql)>q+l , then for have

every infinite t r e e

As a matter of

of

fact, the numbers kX kP

b T, kT a r e either equal o r consecud-subset

; consequently,

tive (D. Kurepa [6]p. 105, theor. 1) ; in either case t h e r e ,is some

(T,,< ) s u c h that

>

kw

PX C P D ( O , 6 ) and
= kw,,

therefore

(0, >kPX >, ,<)

k, w -

and this proves the relation (6.1. ) able t o prove the relation (6.1. )
f

. If a = q , kT

'

> kw
6+1
= kwd

kT =

, we a r e not

Notations. kX means cardinality of

.
of O(

do(+

means means

O (

or

the imediate predecessor of

the immediate follower

O (

BIBLIOGRAPHY

D. Kurepa

Cohen, P.

[I].
[2]

The independence of the continuum hypothesis. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. Usa, 50(1963) ,f 143-1148; I1 P a r t , Ibidem 51(1964) 105-110. New York-Amsterdam , (1966) 4+154.

H .Set theory and the continuum hypothesis,

~ b ' d e l , ~ . [I].

The consistency of the axioms of choice and of the generalized continuum hypothesis (Proc. Nat. Ac. Sci. USA 24(1938)556-557). The consistency of the axiom of choice !and of the generalized continuum hypothesis with the axioms of s e t theory Princeton, N. J., (1940)4+69.

123.

Hilbert, D. Kurepa,D.

"Uber das Unendliche, Math. Annalen, 95(1925)161- 190. [6] [7] Ensembles ordonnes e t ramifies. These, P a r i s , 1935. Publ. math. Belgrad, 4(1935)1- 138.

L1hypothese de ramification, comptes rendus 202,1936. 185-187.

&5]. L1hypoth&sedu continu et l e s ensembles partiellement ofdonnes, Comptes rendus, P a r i s , 205 (1937)1196-1198. [51]. l52]. [89] [92] Mathias A.R.D. Sierpifiski,W. Sur une hypothese d e l a theorie des ensembles, Comptes rendus, P a r i s , 256(1953) 56+-565 (seance du 09.02.1953. Sur un principe de l a theorie des espaces abstraits, Ibidem 655-657 (seance du 16.02.1953).

. .

Sulltipotesi del continuo, Rendiconti del Seminario Matematico, Torino, 18, 1958-59, 11-20. Sur une proposition de l a theorie d e s ensembles, C. r. Sci. P a r i s 249 (1959) 2689-99. A survey of recent r e s u l t s in s e t theory university, 1968).. II+76 (Stanford

Hypothese du continu, Warszawa-L*ow

1934, 6+192.

CENTRO INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO

(C.

I. M. E. )

A.

MOSTOWSKI

MODELS O F S E T THEORY

Corso tenuto a Varenna

dal

1 9 a1 1 7 S e t t e m b r e

1968

MODELS OF SET THEORY by

A. Mostowski

(University of Warszawa)

Lecture

I. Aim of the lectures: t o outline various methods used recently

in construction of models for axioms of s e t theory. in pursuing this aim is attempted.

No completeness

In the introductory lecture I we describe three s y s t e m s of axioms for abstract s e t theory. two primitive notions: "class" and x

In all these systems t h e r e a r e

"membership". y such We define s e t s that x

a s c l a s s e s which a r e capable of being members of other classes: is a set if and only if there is a c l a s s

& y.

We also define atoms a s objects which have no elements. The distinction between s e t s and c l a s s e s was noted already by Cantor terminology. who distinguished between the "consistent sets" and s e t s and (proper) c l a s s e s in the modern As we shall s e e t h e r e a r e axiomatic systems in which "inconsistent s e t s " i.e.

the existence of proper c l a s s e s is assumed and other systems in which their existerice i s excluded. Set

theoretic formulae:

Let

xl, x2,.

. be

a sequence of "x" by any

different l e t t e r s (the variables). other letter and omit subscripts.

(i)Expressions

We shall often replace

elkxi), xi t x . , x i = X. a r e formulae; the J J v a r i ~ b l e xi is the unique f r e e variable m the f i r s t of them and the

A. Mostowski x ,x. a r e the unique free variables of the remaining two. i J (ii) If F and G a r e formulae, then s o is the expres-

variables sion (F)

] (G);

the variable xi F o r in G . F

i s free in this formula if and only

i f it is free in

(iii) If x.
1

i s a formula, then so i s

(x.jF; the variable

is free in this formula if and only if

(The symbol

if j and

xi is free in (xi) i s the

F.

i s the Shefferls stroke and

general quantifier. from as

We define the propositional connectives different

in the usual way; also the existential quantifier i s defined We denote by F r ( F ) the set of those

- I ( x ~ ) IF.).

for which

xi

i s a free variable of

F.

Predicative formulae a r e those formulae in which all quantifiers a r e limited to sets or atomes. We obtain a precise definition of this class of formulae by replacing the rule
(iiil) If (iii) by the following:

I?

i s a formula, then s o i s
k

(xj)(xk) :(xj

xk)

-+ F]

where

i s not in

F r ( F ) and

+ j.
(in symbols

The above expression can also be written a s (xj)(xd [(xj t xk)

I (FI F$
x

Definitions:

i s a set

S(x)): C ~ ( X ) & ( E Y )Y); (X

x is a proper class (Pcl(x)):Cl(x)&7 S ( x ) ; x i s an atom; (At(x)): (y)(y

g x)

We now list axioms of the different systems which we shall consider

The first Ext. Cll.

9 axioms a r e common to them all:

Axiom for classes:

r Cl(x) & Cl(y)& (z) [ (z E x )

(z E

yg + (xZy);

Pcl(x)

(Ey)(y e x);

A. Mostowski

C12. Fund.

(y g x) +Cl(x); ( y c x)

-+

(Ez)

( z E x ) & ( t )[ ( t E z)--t(t

# x)]] .

Remarks. Ext is the familiar axiom of extensionality. C l l says that proper c l a s s e s have elements, i. e. , a r e not atoms. C12 says that whatever has elements is a class. least one minimal element, i. e . , Axiom f o r sets. Pair. Fund is the axiom of foundation and says that each c l a s s which has elements contains a t one whose elements a r e not elements

of the given class; of course the minimal element may be an atom.

fib) v ~ t ( x ) ] & [ ~ ( y ) V ~ t ( y ) ] -+ (Ez) ( ( ~ ( z ) (t) / ( t G Z ) &

(EU

sum. S(X) Pot. Emp. Inf.

~ ( u& l

(2)

S(x) -+ (Ep) [s(P)&(z) (Ex) [ ~ ( x ) &(y) ( y e x u

(EX) ( ~ ( x & )

( Z E u) g ( ~ t [(z E t ) & ( t EX^ {) ) { (215p ) z ( Cl(z) & (t) [ ( t ~ ) 4 t E xd))l z

Lit = x, "(t =

Y)]!)

(EU)(U EX)&(V)

[(vex)

+ ( ~ w ((w )

EX)

di

Remarks.

These axioms state the existence of the unordered

pair of any two objects (which may be s e t s o r atoms), of a union of s e t s which belong t o a given set, of the power s e t of a given set, of t h empty s e t and of at least one infinite set. will be the usual one: the union, The notation for these s e t s i r x for The for the empty set.

3 x, y )

for the unordered pair,

0

P(x) for the power s e t and

uniqueness of these s e t s follows f r o m Ext. F u r t h e r axioms will fulfill a twofold role: f i r s t they will determine the number of atoms; secondly they will express the idea that an image of a s e t under an a r b i t r a r y mapping is again a set. The f i r s t question does not s e e m t o be v e r y important for

A. Mostowski

the abstract set theory and it is nowadays customary t o dismiss it by simply assuming that with the exception of 0 t h e r e a r e no atoms altogether. We shall follow this custom and adopt the following axiom: Noatoms: (x E y)&(xf 0)4 S(x).

The second aim is much m o r e important. It is achieved in many different ways according t o the system of axioms which one adopts. The system of Zermelo-Fraenkel. In this system we f i r s t of all assume that t h e r e a r e no proper classes: Nopcl: the axioms "S(x)". The idea that an image of a s e t is again a s e t is expressed in ZF by the following axiom schema: SubstZF. in which F (x)(E! ) F y Cl(x)+S(x). This axiom together with Noatoms allows u s t o simplify previously given by omitting everywhere the expressions

-+

(a)(Eb)(yl { ( y e b) 5 (Ex) [(x E a ) & ~ ] ]

is an a r b i t r a r y formula such that b is not i t s free variable.

System of ~ 8 d e l - B e r n a y s . In this system we assume that every predicative formula determtines . a , c l a s s and e x p r e s s the idea that the image of a set is again a set not by means of a schema but by a single axiom involving the notion of. a class. F i r s t we define the ordered pairs: <xi, xj> = xi,

1 Fi,xj {] .
.

A c l a s s whose elements a r e ordered p a i r s is called a relation; it is called a function (in symbols Fn(x)) if it satisfies such that the condition: (v = w)3 (y) (y E t ) . ~ (w)(u)(v){[ ( < p , v > ~XI&( < u , w > E x u We denote by (Ez) x"a the c l a s s t

[ (z e a)&(d z,, y> 6 )])

provided that such a c l a s s exists.

A. Mostom ski

The follows: Clex

axioms which we admit in the system GB a r e now a s

GB' SubsbB. Remarks.

(Ex)(Cl(x) & (u) S(u)+ k u E x ) P F]{) Fn(x) & S(a) 3 S(xUa). In Clex

( c l a s s existence scheme) F is a GB predicative formula in which the variable x is not free. The c l a s s whose existence is stated in Clex

{u: u =
class

U]

i s denoted by u:F GB is the universal c l a s s consisting of a l l sets.

);

e. g.

SubstGB x''a

is called the axiom of substitution; note that the

exists by virtue of the class existence scheme. System of Morse. In this system we leave the axiom of

substitution unchanged and extend the c l a s s existence scheme by allowing a r b i t r a r y formulae

F.

We denote these axioms by Clex ZF, GB and GB. ZF

and Subst

M'

Comparison of the s y s t e m s I. ZF is interpretable in

M.

The following theorems a r e easily established: Proof. 111. in ZF. Proof. by GB. If F F is predicative and provable in is provable in GB. ZF, then We interpret c l a s s e s of a s s e t s of GB. ZF.

11. GB is a subtheory of

M (obvious).
By this we

GB is an inessential extension of

mean that each preaicative formula provable in GB is also provable

I (and i t s proof),

Let F be provable in

In order t o establish i t s provability

in Z F it will be sufficient

t o show that every model of Z F can be extended t o a model of GB in such a way that s e t s of the new model be identical with s e t s of the old model. Let therefore M be a model of ZF and let M' be

A. Mostowski

the family of sets here

i t t M: (t, a l ,

...,an)

satisfies

in

i s a predicative formula with

n+l

free variables and

al,...,a of

a r e elements of M. Interpret classes a s elements n M' and the membership relation a s The resulting model satisfies

all the axioms of GB and contains a submodel isomorpkic with and consisting of sets

it G M:

1.
M

All the sets of

M' have

this form which proves the theorem. We shall show l a t e r that GB. Relativisation. formula (xi) F by and Let A(x) be formula in which x x i s a free variable; A may contain free variables other than

is an essential extension of

F r o m every

we may obtain a

(xi) [A(xi) -2

...] .
F
and

formula by replacing each quantifier The new formula i s denoted by F (A)

new

and called the formula

relativised t o

A.

We assume that formulae

do not have any variable in common. It is obvious that symbol ( F ( G ) ( ~ q ( F ( ~ ) ( ~ ) ) (, ( x ~ ) F ) ( ~ ' = ) G

i

( X ~ ) F ( ~ ) if

6 Fr(F)

((x~)F)*

x i A

if

ieFr(F).
relation

The

.= denotes

here the logical equivalence We insert here a note GB and

(not the connective). Functions whose values a r e classes.

about functions whose arguments a r e s e t s and values a r e classes. Of course this notion is important only for systems

M.

A function all of whose values a r e non vojd classes and

whose arguments a r e s e t s can be defined a s a relation. of such a function

fx =

The value

for the argument a s a pair

is simply
0

{ y: < x, y>Ef]
ad

If we want t o admit
f

a s a possible value

of a function, then we define

a, r where r i s

a relation

A. Mostowski a relation and a is a class which contains Dom(r) a s a subclass. The value of x f for the argument
x

is

or

according a s

is an element of We write

Dom(r) o r an element of "f:a

-;L~"

a-Dom(r).

instead of

"f i s a function with

domain a whose values a r e subclasses of

y".

The elementary operations

on functions such a s superposition o r restriction of the domain t o a subclass can easily be defined for such functions. domain a whose values for by Fii. A function with

i
ijka

in a

a r e explicity given will be denoted u s z, then we denote by a

f..

If

f:a-rz,

and

f+(i/u)

the uniquely determined function with domain

uli) whose

restriction to a i s f and whose value for the argument i i s u. Semantical notions defined in set theory. The basic semantical notion i s that of satisfaction: a sequence f of subclasses of a class

satisfy a formula

in

x.

If we want t o discuss this relation in

s e t theory, we have t o replace formulae by certain sets. The following theorems a r e provable in ZF: Frm a, b such that F r m for belong t o

IV.
1

There is a smallest set

i j

, , i >, 0
Frm, in c d

<i j
integers

,< 2

7
and

a r e elements of
( 4,

arbitrary

i, j and is

such that whenever

then s o do <3,

< a, b 2)

<' i, a>>
for

for arbitrary i

(the set of integers). We write 1 write We call for 0 i rx. and

1

x?

Ei =

< 1,

< i, j >-.> and similarly

for ( 2, c i, j%>

We also

for < 3 , c a , b , > a n d Frm the s e t of

r (xi)al

for

<

4,<ira>..

" ~ 8 d e lsets" of formulae.

we denote the subset of Pr ~ b l d e ls e t s of predicative formulae.

By F r m

Fm consisting of

A. Mostowski V. F There is a function F r defined on

) = Fr(

F r m such that Fr(l>lb7) = F r ( a ) the

( x i ) ) = i

= Fr(a)

J F r ( b ), F r ( ' T x i ) a = F r ( a )
1

Fr(

5.ex?

1 it .
3

5. J = l i , jjand ='z 1
We call

set of f r e e variables of a. We call a formula S with f r e e variables a predicative ZF, GB, M if

satisfaction formula for one of our t h r e e systems

the following formulae a r e provable in these systems: Fr(x)); (i) S(x, y, z ) 4 ( x E F r m )&Cl(z)&(y z E Pr (ii) S( % l ( x i P , 2 i, y>], z ) 4 (YE z);

S(

Gig . -xi xJx?1 S( '

=

, { 4 i, yt.> ,
,j < i , y l > ,

j, y">] ,z )

= (ytE

Y");

c j, Y')]

, z) =_ ( y t

= Y");

(iii) S( ralb7, y, z ) z b s ( a , y

[ F r ( a ) , z ) V f S(b, y \ F r ( b ) ,z)]

(iv) S(

r(xi)a7

(v) S( 'Txi)2 A formula

, y, z ) 3 S(a, y, z ) if i f C . ~ r ( a ) ; otherwise:
y. 2) 5

(dl(u c z ) + S ( a , Y u[<i, 01,z)] .

if the following formulae a r e

S(x, y, z)

with t h r e e f r e e variables will be called

a satisfaction formula f o r S(x, y, z)

ZF, GB o r M

provable in the corresponding system:

(it)
4

(x E F r m ) & C1 (z) & (y: F r ( x ) .+z), yi z,

(ii')

S( r ~ l ( x i j l ,y, z )
S( T-,ix? S(
.Y~Z)=

Y ~ G Yj;

Gi
t

= X?

,y,z)= (iii)
Z)

yi = y.,

( i t ) and i (vt)

as

and (iv),

S( r(xi)a7 , y,

(u)

[ (u C

a ) --t S(a, y + (ilu). zj]

In case of the system

ZF

t h e r e is no need t o distinguish of sets.

between the satisfaction and predicative satisfaction formulae because sequences of c l a s s e s can be identified with sequences

A. Mostowski The following theorems exhibit essential differences between systems

Z F , GB and

M:
ZF.

VI. VII.

T h e r e is a satisfaction formula f o r

There is a predicative satisfaction formula for M M GB is consistent

but - provided that VIII. If

no satisfaction formula f o r M.

is consistent, then t h e r e is no predicative

satisfaction formula for

GB, and a l s o no satisfaction formula for GB. VI we define (in

Z F ) two operations on

We shall sketch the proofs of these theorems. In o r d e r t o prove s e t s of finite sequences: Str(z, kl ,k2, dl, d2) =

;) YC

Qu(z, k, i, d) = k if
=

ie

dl" d2 d;

:( Y

I d l # kl) V ( ~ I d 2 4 k2)
E
z)+ y

otherwise
: (u) [(u

2 y E zd 5

yki, u>) E k]{

by

We obtain a predicative satisfaction formula for expressing in the language relations: sequence 1 p, q or of Z F for each

ZF

the conjuction of the following

z
f or

is a set, such it is
j

x g Frm,

y g z Fr(x);
i

t h e r e is a finite either fi f. =
1

that

in Dom(f)

is

there exist

E o r it is = x l P P q j, k both s m a l l e r than i such that

f o r some

o r finally there is a last t e r m of if if if f fi f

f. = I

<i
in

and

a p

such that

fi = k

Cp): f:
with
:

Tf. ) f J
the

is

x;
i

there is a finite sequence Dom(f): r ~ l ( x p F , then

Dom(k) = Dom(f)

such that for each

is
is

ki ={{<p,u>]

UEZ];

5P ex1 q
q

, then
r

ki = f{<p, u > ,<q, v>]: ( ~ 2 )&

(VEZ)

(u e v ) &
;

r x

, then ki=({xp,u,

.<q.u>)

:uez},

A. Mostowski
then

if
if

= f

ki = S t r ( z , k., ky, F r ( f j ) ,P r ( f 4 ) ) .

fi =

(xp) f ;

, then

k.= Qu(z, k . , p, i 3 r ( f j ) ) ;
1

y is an element of the l a s t t e r m of

.
VII is proved by using the

We proceed s i m i l a r l y in o r d e r t o prove the positive p a r t of VII. The negative p a r t of theorem

well known technique of ~ 8 d e l . We a s s u m e that t h e r e e x i s t s a satisfaction formula n in S for M and denote by Fr(n) =

a function such that for every s ( n ) is the n ~ 8 d e l e t of the formula s by substituting n

F r m with

0jthe s e t

resulting f r o m the formula with the ~ 8 d e l e t s f o r i t s unique f r e e variable. i S ( s ( x o ) , 0, V) where V Let n

0

be the ~ 8 d e s e t of the formula l

i s the universal class; we r e l y h e r e of s c a n be defined in s(n,).

course on the fact that the function Then 7 S ( s ( n o ) , 0 , V ) has induction on the length of f r e e variables xl, G and the that

M.
p

Gbldel s e t if G

We prove by

is a formula with
~ 8 d e set l

...,xP

with the M:

g, then the

following equivalence is provable in G(xl,.

.. ,xP

S(g, F i p ~ i V). , G= lS(s(no),O,V) we obtain

Using this equivalence for the r e s u l t that the equivalence and hence
T

G G ~ would be provable in

would be incbnsistent. VIII will be given later.

The detailed proof of theorem

The main idea i s this: we assume the existence of a predicative satisfaction formula for set which is a model f o r GB ZF. and prove i n GB the existence of a

F r o m t h i s we derive (always in GB) GB and thus infer that

the existence of a s e t which is a model f o r

A. Mostowski

GB is consistent.

Thus the consistency of

GB

would be provable in

GB which a s is well known entails the inconsistency of GB.

We conclude with a theorem which we shall need l a t e r and which can be proved by using the s a m e technique a s the one used in the proof of theorem VII. F o r each predicative formula ZF :
is a sequence of

M.

the conjuction of the

following formulae is refutable in

(is')

(x)(y) [T(x, y) A (x E F r m p r ) & (y

s e t s ) & (Dom(y) = F r ( x ) ) ] , (iil')

(i)W (u)

[ T(

'?l(xi)

1< i, u > l )

C U U ~,

similarly a s above with

"

"

replaced by

"

(iid
(iv")
(v")

(a)(b)(y)( ( a E F r m

)& (b E F r m ) 3 ) TE ( ?;l y ) ~ pr pr L-,T(a, y IF r ( a ) ) v-T(b, Y 1 ~ r ( b ) j ) ) )

"

(a)(i)w (y)

1 B E Frrnpr)b-(i$?!Fr(a))-+I~(
Pr
) & ( e F r ( a ) )+ i

(a)(i)w (y) {(a E F r m

IT( x i ) ~ ,y) % y (u) T ( a , y u { ~ i , u ) r ) ) ] ] .

s ( t ) = to. Using h

Txi)n3,

r ~ k

( aY], ]

Proof. Hence the (i")

Let

be the ~ 8 d e set of the formula l T ( s ( x o ) , 0). l

~ 8 d e s e t of the formula 7 T ( s ( t ) , 0 ) is l we infer by H induction that if whose f r e e variables a r e Fr(H), then

(v")

is the

~ 8 d e l e t of s
Xij,

a predicative formula and if f

( =O,l, j

...,k-1)

is a sequence with domain

(i")

T(h, f) H E YH.

H(fio,.

..,fik-l).

If we take in particular Hence the conjuction of

H = CIT(to, 0), we obtain

(v")

leads t o a contradiction.

A. Mostowski Terminological remarks. If

i s a satisfaction formula z x [y j F , then

(or a predicative satisfaction formula), then we shall write instead of S(x, y, z). x by
F

If F

i s the

~ 8 d e set of a formula l

we shall replace

(although it would be more exact t o write

F ' x

and not simply Let and

in these formulae). be its relativisation to the formula x 6 z.

,,...,

F
let

be a predicative formula with the free variables

F(')

xn

Then the formula (~,E.z)L

... &

( y n E z)-i

z t ~ D i l , ~ ~ > <n.y&]] ,.+.,

I = F ( ~ ) ( Y ~ , ,yn),$

Let (y E
Zyr(X))

...

i s provable in each of the considered systems of set theory. zl,z2 be classes, (z2 z2 z

& (z1C X

. If (x)(y) ( ( x ~ ~ Pr )m& r x ly])], then we say that zl

L.

is an elementary subclass of

and write

zl < p r ~ 2 .

A similar

definition can be given for the notion of extension in c a s e when ranges over arbitrary formulae not just the predicative ones. shall not use this notion however.

x
We

LECTURE

I1

The backbone of the whole set theory is the stratification of the universe into levels(simp1e theory of types). the t t e o r e m on definitions by transfinite induction. the c l a s s of all ordinals; in the c a s e of the s y s t e m "x is an ordinal". In discussing We denote by On ZF where t h e r e On(x) means this phenomenon we Shall a s s u m e a s known the notion of ordinals and

a r e no c l a s s e s we think ,of On a s of a formula s o that the s a m e a s x

Sometimes we shall use the expression

On even in Z F treating it a s equivalent with On(x). We define by transfinite induction s e t s Ro = 0, RL

= P(R

1,

R,=U~R,,:~

Rg :

'

r6)
.

(f

is a

limit number). Note: What we define is in GB (or any stronger system) a function which c o r r e l a t e s with each ordinal f c a s e of that (4 Z F we have a formula a set Rt In the R

R(x, y) such that it i s provable in Z F

[odd

+(E ! Y)R(X. y)]

.
x

This unique

y is denoted by

xB

it satisfies the equations given above.

I. F o r every s e t

t h e r e is an ordinal a such that

xSa.

This r leorem is provable in each of our t h r e e systems. The proof is obtained easily from the axiom Fund. The l e a s t ordinal a such that x l R a is called the rank of x. We want t o discuss the problem whether some of the R a t s a r e models of and prove in

ZF. M

In o r d e r t o answer this question we shall formulate

the following theorem: A= A*

I1 (Scott-Scarpellini). L e t each ordinal

u (A
C_

:f e o nf

where f o r Af

&-,

AT

is a set,

and

for each limit ordinal

=U{A+,,: fkf]

Under theses assumptions:

A. Mostowski

(a).

F o r each fF: On

F in

Frmpr

t h e r e is an increasing and fF(a) = a and Fr(F) xEA a '

continuous mapping then each A,)=

F

+ On

such that if f: F r m

F[X]SA/=F~X~. (b). in There is a function Pr (a). the mapping Frm

X On A O n suah that for Pr a + f ( F , a ) satisfies the conditions

formulated in such that if

(c) There is an increasing and continuous mapping t(a) = a, then F. If If and fH.
F

t:On+On

Aa<

prA. of connectives
f~

proof.- (a) which occur in the identity map; sition of we take f G fF = fG.

. We use induction on the number

F

has no connectives, then we take a s

is
If
F

?G
is

I H?

then we take a s and (xi)H1

fF the compothen

T(xi)~'l
I-

i$Fr(G), and

The only c a s e which r e q u i r e s a m o r e elaborate h a s the form

proof is one in which b:On

i 6 Fr(H).

We f i r s t define auxiliary functions

a : ~ ~ ~ ( On, ) and ~ +

.-+ On a s follows:
a(x) = min b ( r ) = sup

r E On:(Eu) [(u . Ar) & ( A k 7 H [xu { ~ u $ a { s i,

xEA r
~ ~ ( J ~ )

a(.):

It follows from these definitions that if

x 6

1 .,

[(A

b H [ u 14i. u~j]))

(u) (AkH Ab(r)

l x*<i, UDjl)~ .
a) 9

, the11 (1)

(*)The subscripts after quantifiers denote t h e i r relativisation t o the formula x d a. Thus (x). means the s a m e a s (x)

1 (x

... . J

A. Mostowski NOWwe define u p

( ) r

c(0) = 0, c(r+l) = max(c(r),b ( r + l ) ) and c ( r ) = Finally we put

f

= f o c. F H This function i s obviously increasing and continuous. If f (x) = r, F Fr(F) we have c(r)> b(r). and for every x in then fH(r) = c ( r ) = r

for limit numbers r.

Ar

It follows A ~ + F 1x1

(ulA ( A ~ H [x+i, r

u,@s(u)~

( A ~ H [xV(ci. u) ] ]

and similarly

[ F J ~(u), X

(ACH [ x u {<i,u))]

-+(u),

(AI=H[

xu{ci.

(b).
= f(H, x)

We define

f(F,x) = x

if

F i s an atomic formula and f( q x i ) ~ ? x)= f(?xi)~l, = x) The proof

(without logical operators), f ( r F I if

i

)F ,:

x) = f(F1, f(F2, x))

4 Fr(H).
c We define

If

i d F r ( H ) , then we put

= f(H, c(x)) where

is defined similarly as in part (a).

t(0) = 0, t ( r + l ) = max ( t ( r ) , sup t ( r '):r' 4 r

i s identical a s in the case (a). (c). If

f
F

f(F,r+l):

F E ~ r r n ~ ~ , t(r) = sup ] ) t ( r ) = r, then f(F, r ) = r

(b),

if

r is a limit number.
and

for each predicative formula

hence, in view of

Ar< prA. Remarks on the Scott-Scerpellini theorem.

We want to

discuss the question whether theorem I can be so reformulated a s t o become provable in ZF o r in GB.

A. Mostowski

The case of t h e system ZF.

Since there a r e no proper

A

c l a s s e s in ZF, we must replace the c l a s s by formulae.

and the relation

x GA

If we do this, then we cannot use the satisfaction formula

since t h e r e is no f ~ r m u l adescribing the satisfaction of an a r b i t r a r y x in F r m in the domain of all s e t s satisfying a given formula A.
in the indicated domair. can be expres-

We come around this difficulty by remarking that the satisfiability of an explicitly given formula F sed by the relativised formula

F,

(A)

Thus we shall have not a single

theorem starting with the general quantifier "for each F in ~ r m " but a theorem schema which can be proved separately for each explicitely given formula F. the s y s t e m describes it The Scott-Scarpellini iheorem takes thus 'in Z F the following form: Let x and. x, y formulae: A(x) and B(x, y) be two formulae with the f r e e variables respectively; let A final change in the wording of the theorem conc e r n s the function fF: since there a r e no mappings of On into On in Z F we must replace the mapping fF by a formula which

be the conjunction of the following

F o r any formula

DF be the conjunction of the formulae:

(XI

[~n(x)

with two f r e e variables

x, y

let

(E

A. Mostowski

With these notations the following holds: formulae A(x), B(x, y) and H(xl,.

F o r arbitrary

..,xn) there

is a formula F(x, y)

such that the implications

a r e provable in ZF. Notice that the formula x's satisfying over family while

says that the domain of a l l

A is the union of s e t s
DF

{ x:B(x, r)]

with

ranging

ordinals and that these s e t s form an increasing and continuous says that

defines an increasing and continuous

mapping of ordinals into ordinals. A similar reformulation of the Scott Is also possible in the case of the system GB. for

Scarpellini theorem

Again we must express

the theorem a s a scheme because there is no satisfaction formula GB. However the assumptions of the theorem and the statement concerning the existence of a mapping can be expressed as in system (in any of our three systems) for unions s

M.

Finally we notice that a theorem similar to the Scott-Scarpellini theorem can be proved of the form

u { A,

:r

where

is an inaccessible cardinal.

Applications of the Scott-Scarpellini theorem. The following theorem is proved in

M; it c&n also be proved in any system obtained

from G'S by adding to it new axioms which secure the existence of a

a predicative satisfaction formula:

11 1.

There is an increasing and continuous function f: On +On f ( r ) = r , then Rr < p r ~ ; in particular, R

:r
is

such that whenever a model of ZF. Proof.

The decomposition

V =

U{ Rr

on]

satisfies

the assumptions of the Scott - Scarpellini theorem. Since all axiom of Z F a r e equivalent t o predicative sentences and a r e valid in V, we infer that
if R is an elementary subset of V, then R

r is a model of ZF. We can now supply proofs of two theorems which we announced There is no predicative satisfaction formula for GB

in Lecture I: IV. provided that GB is consistent. Otherwise we could repeat in GB the proof of theorem I11 and infer that there is a set a which is a model of ZF. Hence by

adding t o a i t s definable subsets we would obtain a model f o r GB. Since this proof would be formalizable in GB we would have a proof in GB that GB is consistent which would entail GB. V. consistent. Proof. T h e r e is a predicative satisfaction formula for
M is essentially stronger than GB,

the inconsistency of provided that GB is

M but none for GB.

VI. consistent. Proof. We denote by of axioms of theorem which is provable in
ZF

Z F is not finitely axiomatisable, provided that it is

the conjunction of any finite number

ZF and show using the version of the Scott

Scarpellini

that t h e r e is an ordinal r such that

A. Mostowski

K. Hence the consistency of K is provable in Pr consistency of the whole Z F is not s o provable.

VII.
GB is finitely axiomatisable.

4'

Z F while the

We merely sketch the proof of this theorem. Call particular instance of the axiom (scheme) t o the f o r m ~ l a F. of Subst SubstGB

F V the

which corresponds

It can then be shown that all the particular instances

GB formulae: (Eul)(Eu2) l ( u = < u1. ? ( u ~ y), (ul E Y)

(UE

can be derived from the axioms

F, ;
U 2 o

UZ>

)&(ul E

, (Eul)(u= < ul. ul> 1,

...F* where F 1 . . .F g a r e the 9

y) & (u G z ) ,

DU

(EU)(U=

<ul,

< u2,
4U2,

< u1

u3>>
U3>>

2 & ( <u2.

< u , t > C y), (Eul)(Eu2)

1~ <
?

U1.

U2>

) &

>

) & ( C u Z . ul> E Y). ( E U ~ ) ( E U ~ ) ( E U ~ )

ul>> C- Y)
U~)>EY)]

fill =

< .I>

) & ( < u 2 >< u l 9

(Eul)(E~2)(E~3)

These axioms state the existence of the following classes:

E = ~ < u , v > :u ~v
Dom (Y), Y x V, Y constructed f r o m can be found

E ~ .3I = ~ < u . u >: u e v ) .

Cnvl(Y), Cnv2(Y) E u If f o r which H(u).

v H

Y, Y A Z .

Y,

and our theorem reduces t o t h e r e is a c l a s s

the statement that f o r every predicative formula above and consisting of all Natural models. of Z F , GB, o r

and I by means of the operations enumerated Details of this proof

in G8de11s monograph.

is an ordinal and R

is a model

M, then we call it a natural model of the corresponding system

In theorem I11 we established (in M) the existence of a "tower" of natural models f o r Z F which is ordered by the relation that the existence even of a single pair Rr' Rs such that ~~dR Pr s We do cannot be established in ZF provided that ZF is consistent. t h i s by proving in Z F the following:

-<Pr

We now show

A. Mostowski VIII. (Montague a model of ZF. Proof. We f i r s t show that Since the formula r there is an (Exl)(xo hence R r is a limit number

Vaught).

If

R,(~,R,;

then

is

je:

0.

(Ex)(xZx) is true in r # 0. Rs 1f . such that

Rs, it i s t r u e in R

and

+0
x xl)

and in

t t r , then

is satisfied by r' t +l#r.

R x. t Rt in R and hence it must also

R eR and hence t r Thus the formula

be satisfied in R and therefore

Thus there is an r

in R

such that

R E x

Using the fact that check that all axioms of ZF

is a positive limit number we easily

a r e valid in

Rr

The verification is
ZF

evident in all caseswith the exception of the axiom scheme Subst which requires a separate treatement. Let. F be a formula with
k+2 free variable and let

5 E R:~'~)in R let .

' i ~ be such that 'f

Rr
y

+ xi)^! x j
in R

' F[ J

.
R~

For

f(x) be the unique

Let

such that Im(f, a) = b

( q,

! F[~U,&, =

-x

x,,
F

4, y

x and x P and l e t a be an element of and satisfies the condition is the formula

be variables The s e t

which do not occur in belongs t o where

H

Rr' R s

Rs

~ [ ~~ v a>, p , i

b>]]

It follows that t h e r e is a s e t R r k H [ ~ u ) < p a> , < q, b>i] , Thus axiom Subst ZF

M.
is valid

b'

in

Rr

such that b1 = Im(f, a).

and we easily prove that in Rr' Theorem

IX can obviously

be also proved in

A. Mostowski
In o r d e r to obtain m o r e information about the relation in the c l a s s of a l l R 's we introduce the following definition:

<'
P s

We c a l l an ordinal t h e r e is a sequence and that R f(t) t<tl< s f

extendable if f o r any ordinal s for such that f(0) = r t, t '

of o r d e r type

prRf(o

each p a i r

such

F r o m part

( c ) of the Scott-Scarpellini

theorem it follows

that t h e r e a r e extendable ordinals.

Moreover t h e r e a r e ordinals On consisting of

such

that t h e r e is a sequence of o r d e r type a r e elementary extensions of R

R 's
X

which

and well o r d e r e d by the relation

<

The next theorem is provable in

M.
r
such that hold. Rr

pr'

IX.
there are

(Ryll Nardzewski).

F o r each extendable ordinal

a r b i t r a r i l y high ordinals does the relation Let

>r

-(

but f o r no t > s Proof.

R (pr~t

R Pr s

us a s s u m e that t h e r e is a

( l e a s t ) extendable

such that t h e r e e x i s t s an ordinal

so

>

so

and

Rr

<pr~s

then R s

that because of the extendability of such that Rr<pr Rs s

0

< Pr R t f o r s o m e t > s.
r
be extended t o an f

>r

with the properties : whenever We notice

t h e r e a r e a r b i t r a r i l y high

s s

and our assumption s a y s that each such Rt

from a certain

on can further

.
by

F o r a r b i t r a r y finite sequence m ( f ) the l e a s t ordinal R m l f ) and R r(prRm(f). follows :

of s e t s we denote f

>

such

that all t e r m s of

belong t o

Consider the formula T(x, f) defined a s

A. Mostowski

we

shall show that this formula has the charateristic pro-

perties (if')-(v")of the truth predicate (cf. Lecture I, theorem IX). Since we know that we can refute the conjunction of (i") - (v") we shall have the proof that our assumption leads to a contradiction a s soon a s we veri= fy that T has the properties ( i f ' )- (v").' Of these, ( i f ' ) , (ii") and (iv") a r e obvious
In o r d e r to verify the remaining two we prove a lemma:

I f so < s < t a n d n r 5 R R r S,

R R , thenlS< Pr t pr t ' is an elesuch that

Proof of the lemma. F o r each s >s such that R

0

mentary extension of R

we denote by s 1the least ordinal )s

The existence of s 1follows from s' our a s ~ u m p t i o n s .Now we s t a r t from given ordinals S, t and construct two Rs, is an elementary extension of R sequence f and g saticfving the inductive equations f(O)=s, f(n+l)'
= (f(n)I1,f ( u ) =sup {f(n): n c u 3

, g(0) = t , g(n+l) = (g(n)I1, g(u)=

sup {g(n): n < u ) ,

We obviously have R

< R and f(n) p r f ( m )

g(n) <,,R~(,)

f o r n.4 m; moreover V =
: n
G O n

U
Pr

R ~ ( ~n ,

on) RF r ( x )
S

U{
S

Rg(n)
<pr

.Let x t F r m

and y

Since R

V we infer that R s + Rt

we prove similary that Rti=

X

XprV

x [y]

( F

b x

. lyj

and therefore

I- Y; = -

v k x [y]

whence ( R . ~ = x

[Y])

L (RtkX

[Y3)

The lemma is thus proved. Verification of condition (iii"). Let us assume that

A. Mostowski

This assumption is equivalent t o the statement that either R m(f) +..,x1

I -

I -

'fi

Fr(x2)]

. Eince by

the lemma R

m(f)

pr Rm(f ) F r ( x . )
1

for i= 1, 2 we infer that the

previous statement i s equivalent t o the disjunction of the statements Rm(f

I Fr(xi)) *?x:

[f

Fr(xi)]

for

i = l,2

and this disjunction

is precisely the right hand side of (iii"). Verification of condition (v"). We a s s u m e that x E F r m and i F r ( x ) . Let us consider the x [f 0 ( < i , u>j]

statement T ( ' (x.) 2

m(f)'

'

, f);

this statement says that f is a sequence with domain F r ( x ) and that

j= Rm(f)

for every u in R

We hLve t o

prove that this statement is equivalent t o the following: for every u, R m ( f ~ { < i ,u s ]
x

rf u)-=i,

u1 1 .

Obviously the first statement is implied by the second because m(f w (( <i, u
NOW we m(f) ' assume the f i r s t statement and choose an a r b i t r a r y u. By the l e m m a

>2

) = m(f) whenever u is in R

Rm(f)

<

p r R m ( f ~< i , u) {

) and hence the f i r s t statement implies

@(xi). [gwhence we infer that the second statement is Rm(fu{< i. u > ) ) valid. Theorem IX i s thus proved A theorem similar t o M can also be proved for other transfinite sequences of sets, for instance for s e t s L shall discuss later. which we

A.

Mostowski

In connection with theorem M we discuss briefly the ordinals which a r e not extendable. Let us call a function f whose do=

main is an ordinal r and which satisfies the condition

<'pr Rf(,, f o r a r b i t r a r y m E n E r a chain of length r s t a r = f(n) ting i n f(0). An ordinal s i s not extendable if and only if t h e r e is
R an ordinal r such that t h e r e is no chain of length r s t a r t i n g at s. The l e a s t such r is called the height of s. The height of an extendable ordinal could additionally be defined a s On. We don't have an exact charscterisation of ordinals

which a r e heights of non extendable o r d i n a l s . However we can exhibit a r a t h e r l a r g e number of examples of such ordinals. We call an ordinal r

-> 0

an

R- definable ordinal i f t h e r e

is a predicative formula F with

Fr(F) =

such that whenever

S

s E O and r n Rs

Rs, then r is the unique element of R x,f]

such that

[ (<O,

while 0 is a unique such x if r

. .

We c a l l F a definition of r. We now prove in M:

X. ( W i l m e r s ) . F o r every R-definable ordinal r t h e r e is

an ordinal whose height i s r+l.

Proof. Using p a r t (c) of the Scott - Scarpellini theorem we easily prove that t h e r e a r e ordinals x such that R element a chain of length r
X

contains a s

1. Let a be a smallest such ordinal

and l e f be a chain of length r

+ 1 which belongs t o Ra

b = f(0) and claim that the height of b is r + 1 Since f i s a chain of length r obvious that the height of b i s
is a chain

. We put

+ 1 starting at b, it is

1 Now we a s s u m e that t h e r e .

of length r

2 starting at b and derive f r o m t h i s a s s u m =

ption a contradiction. There e x i s t s a predicative formula H with

A. Mostowski Fr(H) =

0, 1 1 P u

such that for an a r b i t r a r y ordinal

p and a r b i t r a r y u, v in R

H P is a chain of length
(1
R

< 0,
7).

>

<

I, v

(V

E On)&(u

We shall indicate below how to construct such a formula. Assuming that we c a r r i e d out the construction we proceed a s fol= lows. We easily show that n G Rn+l) c

g(n+l)

for a r b i t r a r y

n in r + 1; since g(n) G R
R

g(r+l)

we s e e that g

1
r

(r+l)E

g ( r + I).

Now

( r + 1 ) is a chahof length

1 and hence

R g ( r + 1) I = H [ { < o , g ( r + l ) > , <I, r+l>T] Denoting by F a definition of r we obtain from the l a s t formula

R g ( r + 1)

EX^) EX^) EX^)

[ F ( x ~ ) & ( x 2 # 0)

Since R

g(0)

is an elementary subset of

g ( r + 1)

we

can replace in this formula g ( r

1) by b

g(O), i. e.

by b. We thus

infer that there a r e elements c, d of R

such that k f 0, R

P b '

F [{<2,

r>jj

and R b

H [{do,

d>,

<

1, c

+ I>?]-

A. The first of these formulae provesthat

Mostowski and the

c = r

second that d is a chain of length r + l . Since d 62 Rb and

b

<
R

a ,

we obtain a contradiction with the definition of It remains t o construct the formula

H

. Let
x =

R' ( x , y ) be a formula which defines the relation

=

(cf. p

79

and let

G ( z, t ) be the formula
6, (

(f): (

C Frm

P = '

) & (f

c zFr(X))

! =

xCfJ)--.

The required formula is On(x

& i 6
1

) & F n ( x ) & ( D o m ( x o ) = x l ) & ( i ) ( j ) ( z ) ( t ) 0 j ) +G( & (

z,

j x ~o ) & ( t

>

t>fx0)+

)I .
ZF

Natural models of G B and of M . These models a r e si= tuated much l e s s densely than the natural models of ZF: we shall prove the following result in the system

AC

resulting from GB if and to

ZF

b y adjunction of the axiom of choice:

XI. (Shepherdson) anly if r is of the form

Rr

is a natural model of

s + 1

and

is a

strongly inaccessible

cardinal; this condition is also necessary and sufficient f o r be a model of

.
R is a model of GB o r of M

Proof. If r is a successor , t

, then

r = s + 1 because there exists a universal and f a mapping of t

of the model. F r o m the satisfiability of the axiom Subst it follows that if

is an ordinal < s .

A. Mostowski Im ( f, t ) & R s and hence t h e r e is an ordinal Im ( f, t )

into s t1< s

, then

such that

t'

This proves that

is

weakly inaccessible. In o r d e r t o show that s is strongly inaccessible we have t o show that if l e s s than
s

<

s , then the cardinal nwmher of t Rs

P ( t )

is

By our assumption R

and hence p( t )

Rs.

Since we assume that as

is a model of GB and since t h e r e s + l is a well ordered set which belongs to R and has the same power
S

P ( t ) , we infer that t h e r e exists an ordinal number in

Rs

which has the s a m e power a s

is s m a l l e r than

P ( t )

. Thus .

this cardinal number

.
M a r e t r u e in

If all

s is strongly inaccessible, then we easily check that

Rs + f In particular the is an9 mapping of

the axiom of

axiom Subst is satisfied because if

Rs

into R s and a belogs to Rs, then Im(f, a) belogs t o R

A comparison with theorem

s'

VIII r ,
1 ?

suggests the following

s ( r
(

problem: how t o characterize ordinals sfying the relation Rr

+

XprR s +

s )

sati=

It i s easy t o s e e in

that this problem is wrongly expressed because the relation question never holds (R

but not of R is the l a r g e s t element of R r r+l s+J. Therefore we modify the problem and discuss not the relation of elementary extbnsion but a closely connected relation of elementary embeddability. Definition. t h e r e is a function f Rr is elementarily embeddable in Rr isomorphically Rs (with if whith maps

A.

Mostowski

respect t o the relation

onto an elementary subset of r

XII. (Reinhardt). If
and r'

Rs is a strongly inaccessible ordinal

>

R r + l r, then

i s elementarily embeddable into

Rr'

where

is measurable. f be a function which embeds R Rr + is a model of

=

Proof. Let into Rr,

+

r + l

. Since

GB, the same is

t r u e of

R r'

+ p and hence r ' + p

Rr

, where

is Rr+, maps

strongly inaccessible. Since and Rr Rs onto

is the largest element of

the largest element of R

Rs + 1
r

it follow that

( i. e. f( Rr ) = R s ). s Similary f( r ) = s since

is

the l a r g e s t ordinal

and s R r + l hand the range of f

Of

the largest ordinal of

( r

Rs +

.
p

On the other

1 )

is strictly contained in Obviously

s s

for reason of cardinality. such that ment in r p

Hence t h e r e is an ordinal r + 1 ) ). must be the value of f

Rg ( f

1(

P f R g ( f ) f for an argu=

because an ordinal in

Rg ( f )

+ 1

.
it easily follows that for arbitrary x, y in

F r o m the properties of and

+

f ( x n y ) = f ( x ) nf ( y ) , f ( x V . y ) - f ( x ) V f ( y ) f( x - y ) = f( x )

f ( y )

Rr

F o r instance the f i r s t equation is established by no= x 0 y

is characterised a s the unique element
z

ticing that

which

togcther with (t) (t 6 x 0 ) together with R s + l '

x and y satisfies in

Rr

the formula

I ( E xl [ t

& ( t

x2)

Hence

f ( z )

f ( x ) and f ( y )

satisfies the s a m e formula in

A. Mostowski Now claim that we put F =

{
r

r : p 6 f ( x )] r

and

F
If

is a filter of subsets of
t

which is prime and

t-multiplicative f o r each x,

<

.
p f ( x )

y e F,

then

f ( y ) = f ( x A y )

and If x

hence

x n y 6 F
and r G F
F

.
x
F,

y C r

then f ( x ) = f ( x ) n f ( ~2 f ( ~ ) ) y
F

and hence

p E f ( y ) , i.e., Hence

F.

From

p CE s = f ( r )

it follows that If
= s

and hence

is not void.

is a filter of subsets of

x 5 r,

then

r = x d ( r f ( x ) or p

x )

and we infer f ( r ) = p x )

= f ( r - x ) y

Since

, it follows that

either x or

p 6 f ( x ) r - x

f ( r and
F

; both these formulae

cannot be true because

f ( x ) fl f ( r

x ) = 0
F

Hence either

belongs t o F

is
t

prime.

Now we show that if cative. Let of

F

t & r and g

, then

is t-multipli=

be a sequence of type g e R r + l g

consisting of elements
+

Since

satisfies in

Rr t

formula which s a y s that infer that f ( g )

is a function with domain

, we

satisfies in

Rs

it is a function with domain The intersection unique element of Rr Rr + the formula

f ( t )

the formula saying that can be characterised a s the g satisfies in

n Rg

( g )

which together with

( t E x O ) = ( w ) ( v ) [(<I,

V>E X1)+(t R s + l

E
by

vd

Hence the same forfnula is satisfies in f ( n R g ( g ) and f A g ) )

A.
Now we notice sf'ied i n R that the s a m e formula
i j r

Mostowski

1 Rg(f(g)) = s + l by ( Rg(f(g)) and f(g) and hence Since Rg(g)S F, we s e e that pE f(x) f o r e v e r y x in Rg(g).

f(nRg(g)).

also sati=

Now no=

tice that x 6 Rg(g) is equivalent t o t=(Ey)( ( y, xo) d x l ) [ {<o, x > Rr+l R s + l I ( ~ y ) (<y. xo> E x l ) [{< 0. f ( x ) > =

.c

< 1, g>]l

and hence t o to

1, f ( g ) > ~ ] ; i. e..

f(x) E R (f(g)). Thus p is an element of e v e r y m e m b e r of Rg(f(g)), g Rg(g) E F. i. e. , p& flRg(f(g)) = f ( 0 Rg(g)). Hence

This proves theorem XIII. Notice that this proof like the proof of theorem XI was c a r r i e d out in the s y s t e m Z F

+ AC.

A. Mostowski Lecture 111 In this lecture we shall apply the Scott

Scarpellini ZF

theorem to obtain various families of sets which form models of We call a set in
f

A P '

predicatively closed if for every a with Fr ( F ) =

A , every in aFr ( a

e
,

Frm

and for every

) the set

=
set F

Fx e a : a
SF ( a, f ) f. and

b F [ f

u +O.

x jjJ >]; 2
of A

belongs to A.

The

will be called the section elements a

of a determined by

We shall show that all sectionsof sider the following operations:

can be obtained by iterating finitely many operations Let us con=

A.

Mostowski

I. If
rationa

and A is closed with respect t o the ope=

1 2 , then

is predicatively closed.

We shall only indicate the essential steps of the proof. F i r s t we notice that an a r b i t r a r y finite sequence whose t e r m s a r e integers belongsto
A

. Hence

if a set

of finite sequen=
A , then s o

c e s with a common finite domain does the set of all sequences

f

d S d ~ e l o n g st o C
x

o x where

ranges over

and

i s a fixed one one mapping of a s e t d' onto d. Fr( F Hence if the s e t

belongs t o A , then s o does the set

{ x , a F r ( F' k
A
1

.
- A

where F ' a r i s e s from F by a permutation of variables. By i t c r a t i n g suitably the operations prove that if a d d 12

we

is a finite s e t of integers and

easily infer that if

a G A , then and
d

& A.

F r o m this we

is

a s e t of finite sequences with a common finite domain ranges contained te s e t df in a d where a

is in

and with

A , then for e v e r y fini=

such that

d j ~ W the s e t

f ( ad' : f .

d E s t

belongs t o A. Finally we show that i f integers and f s n a

cs A ,

is

a finite s e t of

,s

ad

" ln3,
u>]

then the s e t s]{ belongs to

A along with

ad : ( Eu )

[ f U{ < n,

.We show this by noticing that in o r d e r to obtain s it is sufficient to subtract from every member

this s e t f r o m

A. Mostowski of

the s e t of all s e t s of the form \<n, Let us now consider the set
f

t>]

where
=

L
F is

a.

{f

E aFr@) : a )= F

I] .

DF ( a ) If a E A
,

and

one of the formulae r ~ l ( x 0 D ( a ) btlongs t o

A

rxo t

x:

rxo = x z

, then

a s we easily see inspecting the operations A we extend t h i s result t o the A

2,

A1O case when A

3

Using the operation

F

has a r b i t r a r y variables. Using the operations established above we show that if

a s well a s the r e m a r k s

D ( a )
Fi

for F =

i = 1, 2, then the same result is t r u e for the

c a s e s when we use

r F1

F :

and

F =

r(

xi ) F : from

Finally

A I 2 in o r d e r to construct

SF( a, f )

DF( a )

The main result of the present lecture is a s follows: 11. let If in addition
A

be a family of s e t s (indexed by ordinals) a =

which satisfies the assumptions of the Scott

u { As

Scarpellini theorem. and A

is transitive

s E 0nj
r

and predicatively closed for every ZF.

in On, then A

is a model of

Proof. The verification of most of the axiom is immediate We discuss only the axioms Inf, Pot and Subst which a r e slightly mo= r e difficult to verify,. Axiom of infinity r n of ordinals: r 0 = 0,

We define by induction a sequence

s
:

r n+l = min

Ar n

and put

A. Mostowski

r = sup r

n'

then A

satisfies the conditions stated in the axiom Inf. a CS Ar and x in

Axiom of power set. F o r let

s ( x ) = min

P(a) n A

f
A]

s: x g A s $ , t =

max (r , sup

s ( x ) :
(xCa) & and F is

: x g & ( x

P ( a ) At ).

r\

Then

x C A -3(x

CP(a ) =
At E A A
.

Now take an ordinal

SF( At,

u such that a>)) (v E x l )

determine the section the formula ( v )

< 1,
+

[. ( v

xo )

7
>

of

where

This section is equal to tively closed ,

p( a ) . A n
U

and since

A u

is predicaz

it belongs t o A

and hence t o A .

Axiom of substitution formula with a sequence in Fr( F )

AFr(

. Let
1

2 f ) -

0,

3 . F u r t h e r m o r e let
'1
For such that x in A let

and let

F p

be a be

A k ( x O )( E ! x l ) F f ( x ) = m i n

ip].

< 1.
such

>
that

"
u

s : ( E y ) [ PI)]? and put

( y e A S ) & ( A * ' F

[{

40, x>

t = max( r , sup

f(

x ) : ( x C-- Ar u

)I)-

Using the Scott - Scarpellini theorem we determine an ordinal

>

and

for arbitrary

x, y in

AU the following

equivalence holds :

Finally we choose an ordinal SG( Au.

v such that a

and determine the sectiom. an integer such that (xl) x j

AU E Av
j

< j,
F
(
XO

>y
and

p ) where
G

is

isjnot f r e e in
( Exo

is the formula &F]Z

( x1

xO)

X. J

A. Mostowski This section which we denote by condition b belongs t o A and satisfies the

Remark. Theorem I1 was proved above on the basis of the system

M

There is a version of this theorem which can be

B

established in

ZF. Similary a s on p. 82 we consider a formula A by

with two free variables and define a formula (Er)

[ On( r

) Ri B( x, r

Let

C*

be the conjunction of the

4 formulae listed on p. 8 2

and of the following formulae:

the s e t

1x

(The f i r s t of the above formulae expresses the fact that

: B(x, r ) ]

is transitive and the second that this A

set

is closed with respect t o the operations

- A obviously,the 1 12 ' second formula should be expressed in t h e language of Z F which

can easily be done by writing down the definitions of set theoretic formulae).

Ai(x, y )

as

Imitating the proof of theorem I1 we can derive from C in Z F all formulae obtained f r o m the axiom of Z F by relativising all quantifiers to the formula A. In other words the formula A define an interpretation of ZF in ZF

.
ZF.

Examples of c l a s s e s which determine models of Example 1. V =

UI Rr
t

: r E On]

.
103)j

Example 2: set a a' =

constructible sets. We define f o r an a r b i t r a r y

SF(a, f) : (F E F r m

Pr

) & (0 b F r ( F ) ) & (f 6 a F ~ ( F )

a ' is the family of all sections of a determined by an a r b i t r a r y formula F in Frm Pr and an a r b i t r a r y sequence f with t e r m s

in a. We now put Lo = 0; The union

Lr

= L',;

Ls

U{ L

: r t s (s is a l i m i t number)

L =

u{ L

: r E On)

is

called the c l a s s of con=

structible sets. It i s e a s y t o construct a relation which well o r d e r s the c l a s s L. We define it a s the union Xo = 0, X
=

Vi Xr
if

: r

on]

where

{
Lr
+

: r

s
X

s is a limit number and where i'or element

+
every

is obtained f r o m
u in - Lr

by the following construction. we denote by f in

the e a r l i e s t

of F r m

Pr

such that f o r s o m e

Fr(F) -

03

The t e r m "earliest" r e f e r s t o a fixed well ordering of the denumerable s e t Frm

Pr

which we think

of a s fixed in advance. f for which the above the e a r l i e s t of them in the

If t h e r e a r e many sequences equation is t r u e then we denote by

f
U

lexicographical ordering 4 of finite sequences induced by the r e = 4 lation

.
+

Now we define

Xr

a s the union of

Xr,

of the s e t

pairs

< u,

v>

where

and

both bdong to

Lr

1 - Lr

A.

Mostowski

and either or FU = Fv and f ( u(

precedes

F in the well ordering v

fv. L is a model of

In o r d e r t o prove that blish four simple lemmas: 1. Lr S L r

ZF

we e s t a =

+ l
0

f o r each
=

Proof.
2.

L r = S rx L

i t s own section.
(i) Each

,-, 0

in

On

.
L r

(Lr, 0 ) and hence If

is

is transitive; ( i i j

s E r, then

Ls

Lr.

We prove both parts simultaneously by induction on F o r r = 0 the l e m m a i s trivial; if it holds for all r < r

r.

and r is a 0 0 limit number, then it is obvious that the lemma is also t r u e f o r

0' that

Now assume that Lr

= r

1. It will be sufficient t o show 1 i s transitive

xo G

C Lr

and

Lr

Thus assume 1, a>) ) e l z r

x
+

a eLr;hence Transitivity of element of L r

+

a = a f ) L Lr

= S T

x ;

+
1

1'

1 then

follows now from the r e m a r k that i f

x

is an

is a section of

and thus

x CLrSLr

3. If k is a set

of ordinals and

r = sup k, then

Lr

= U ) L ~ : k~ E ]

Proof. If r E k, then the lemma r e s u l t s from the mono= Lr; if

f

tonicity of the sequence inductive equation for the

4. lf a L

k, then it results from the l a s t

L 's and the lemma 2(ii).

then each section of a belongs t o L r + l ' r' Proof. We use the following simple fact which can easily

A. Mostowski

be established by induction on the number of connectives in a formula: and l e t F Pr relativising all quantifiers to the formula x. does not
1

Let

F Lf F r m

-%

be obtained f r o m x

by

xi where the variable aGX and

occur in

F.

If

is a transitive set,

f E aFr(F), then

We take now

X = L

r'

and assurne

that

0 EFr(F)

and

f E aF r ( F ) , where a E: L rs We obtain then S (a, f ) = S w (L f ~ { i i , a > ] ) which proves that the F F & (xO E xi) r, section
S ( a , f ) belongs t o F

L r + l . ZF. we can represent L as

111. L is a model of Proof. In view of the union numbers.

lemma 2(ii)

U {L
L

r e o n ] where the indices range over limit show that all assumptions of theorem L in particular the predicative
4 because each element

Lemmas

1 - 4

I1 a r e satisfied by the family closure of of L W.

a. r

C3.r r e s u l t s from lemma

X

'

belongs t o s o m e L X+ 1

with

x<O

.r

and hence i t s sections

a r e elements of L

which is contained in L

L2.r

.
with union

Example 3.

Relatively constructible sets. We s t a r t

a transitive set a and put L (a) = a,

L r + l ( a ) = L;(a),

L (a) =
s

u { Lr(a)

: r <s] (s is a limit number). The

u{Lr(a) : r Q O n

1=

L ( a ) is called the c l a s s of s e t s constructible L ( a ) is a model

in a. We can show s i m i l a r y a s in theorem I11 that

A.

Mostowski

of ZF. More general notions of relative constructibility a r e pos= sible. We shall sketch a definition due t o Solovay.

We consider a wider c l a s s of formulae. We adjoin t o the atomic formulae Cl(x.), x. e x and x = x which were used thus f a r I i j i j still one type of atomic formulae U(x.). We call the smallest c l a s s of
1

formulae which contain all atomic formulae (including the new ones) and is closed with respect to the operations

FIG

and (x.)F the c l a s s

1

of generalised formulae. The notion of satisfaction can be defined in a similar way a s for the c l a s s of ordinary formulae. Whereas for= merly we defined the notion of satisfaction of a formula F in a s e t , we must now use a more general relational system. Let x, y be s e t s such that x z y . The atomic formula U(x.) is satisfied in this s y s t e m
1

by a

sequence f if and only if f . e y ; other atomic formulae a r e s a = y> just in case they a r e satisfied in x. The y> i s defined

tisfied in the system (x,

inductive clauses of the definition of satisfaction remain the s a m e a s before. The notion of section in a relational system <x, a s follows: SF ( < x , y,, f) is the s e t consisting of all a in x such Let (x, y>' that the sequence ~v{<o, a>) satisfies F in <x, y>

be the set of all sections of <x, y) explained.

in the generalised sense thus

=O,

F o r an a r b i t r a r y transitive class A we put now L (A) = 0 L ~ Lr+l = Lr, L r n A and L S = U ~ : r E s) if s is a

<

>'

limit number. It can be shown siniilary a s in the proof of theorem I11 that L(A) is a model of ZF.

A.

Mostowski

Example 4.

Various generalisations of constructible sets.

The c l a s s L can be defined in still another way which is sometimes technically m o r e convenient and moreover susceptible t o various neralisations. Let n be an i n t e g e r a l 2 . We define by transfinite induction n type of the s e t For a mapping d
: O n 4 O in such a way that d (0) = n

ge=

0 and the o r d e r n 3 Zn(x)= r c O : d n ( x ) < r < dn(x+l)J be n. (dn(x)) n

limit numbers x we require that d (x) = sup{ d (r) : r n n

<x)

Let In, Kn, x$(In(x), of the s e t

Ln, Mn be functions such that the correspondence Kn(x), Ln(x), Mn (x)) determines a one - one mapping

Z (x) onto n x d ( x ) x d ( x ) x d (x). F o r y = d (x) we put n n n n n I(y) = K(y) = L(y) = M(y) = 0. We now define a transfinite sequence C : O 4 by induction: n

'M

(x)

provided that x does not have the f o r m d (t) and I (x) n n (C x). n In the last part of the inductive definition BI3,. then C

< 12;

if I (x) >12, n

BI

.., Bn

a r e operations on sequences of s e t s which s a t i s f y the condition B(~)C Rg(f) v U Rg(f) for each transfinite sequence f. The sequence C dn(r) = Cr is increasing and satisfies the t + t cOnditiOnsCrE Cr+l and = r<s where r , s e o n and s
X

'Icr:

is a limit number.

We easly show by induction that each C

i s a transitive

set

A. Mostowski

(the factors C tion for C

Mn(x)

were added in the third inductive equa=

just in o r d e r t o achieve the transitivity of the s e t s C ). 3C Finally it can be shown that if s is a limit number, then C is clo=
S

sed with respect t o the operations A1

A12 and hence C is predi= *

S

catively closed. F r o m theorem I1 we thus obtain IV. The c l a s s C Remarks. del of Z F in

=u{c~: O ~ ] is rE

a model of ZF.

It should be s t r e s s e d that the c l a s s C is a mo=

independently of how we choose the operations B 13,. .Bn construct

the l a s t inductive equation. This shows that we may

many different models of Z F using the above method. In case when we do not have any additional operations

(i. e . , when n = 1 2 ) the resulting c l a s s is identical with L; the proof

of this is rather complicated (see Linden, Sets models and r e c u r = sion theory, North Holland 1967). the x-th t e r m of the s e = min quence C in case whe'n n = 12; the union of all C will be denoted
X

We shall use the symbol

cminf o r X
cmin

by

cmin;by

the result quoted above,

I , .

We now give an example where we use additional operations. Let n = 15. and let a be a fixed transfinite sequence of type r tisfying the condition a s s {ar: r ~ s } f o r each 0
Sa=

sCro.

We define the additional operations B 13, B~~ and

B1

a s follows:

if f is not a function o r Dom(f) $ Op, then we take B.(f) = 0 for

i = 3

Otherwise we denote Dom(f) by r and put r if r < r 0 and Blg(f) = 0 if r 7 r

I0'

B13(f) = a

A.

Mostowski

The c l a s s C obtained in this c a s e depends on a and will be denoted by E: (a). The effect of the operation Blg is that a l l t e r m s Z of a will eventually appear in the sequence C (a). They occupy pla= ces x f o r which I (x) = 13. 15 In view of the definition of B 14 the

Z t w m s C (a) where I (x) = 14 a r e consecutive ordinals. Finally x 15

terms' C (a) with I (x) = 15 a r e equal t o the common part of C x 15 M1 5 ( ~ ) and a segment of the sequence % ( a ) indices C K (x). 15 The effect of the operation B

consisting of t e r m s with

15

is this :

is

Lemma. F o r each ordinal r the sequence Z an element of C (a).

{ < x,

~ : ( a ) > : x E r}

Proof. Let s be a limit number) r and let t be an ordinal such that I15(t) = 15, K 1 5(t) = r and M15(t) = d 15(s). In view of the

inductive definition of the sequence C ( a ) we have.

X

All ordinals x < r a r e elements of C

(a); t h i s follows dl 5 ( ~ )

from the r e m a r k that t h e r e is a sequence of type s of ordinal L d satisfying the equation I

(x) = 14 Since 15

z C (a) is
x

(s) 15

an element! of Cx(a)) with

(a)

f o r every x < r , we infer that the pairs (x,

A. Mostowski

x ( r belong t o

5(s1
Cx(a)

(a) for each x 4 r. Hence C ( a ) is equal to the t

sequence

{ <x,

> : XE r

As a n application of the above r e m a r k we prove the follo= wing theorem: V. The axiom of choice is consistent with ZF. Proof. Since C (0) is a model of Z F , it will be sufficient t o show that the axiom of choice is true in this class. Now it is e a s y if this c l a s s contains with t o show that if a transitive c l a s s is a model of Z F , then the axiom of choice is true in this c l a s s if and only every element x a function which maps ordinals onto a s e t y

In view of the l e m m a the model C ( 0 ) has this property which proves the theorem. Definable well orderings of the universe. F o r x in C we define Od(x) = min The relation R~~~ min

3 x.

={ c X ,y> ccmlnX ~ m i n :Od(x) ~ ~ d (]y is )

min

r :x = C

r.

obviously a well ordering of C

It can be shown that the relation R Even a stronger theorem is true:

min

is definable in C

min

VI. T h e r e a r e finitely many sentences K1,. F r ( F ) = Fr(G) = 0,' [ K1,.1 1. , K ' . which the axioms

.. ,Kn which

belong t o the s e t of axioms of Z F and formulae F , G in F r m a r e valid, then

with P=such that whenever m is a transitive c l a s s in n

A.

Mostowski

{ < 0. x 7 ) I), min 1, ( y m ) - t ( m f ; ~ [ { (0, x , . < I , y > ] J ) = ( y C, m l + L ( m t GL [ L O , x,, c 1, Y))] )z( CX, y > c ~
(mt IE!X~)F[
=

The formula G is defined from F a s follows:

( E X ~ ) ( E X {on(x2) & ~ n (31 & ( x Z e x3) & F ( X ~ xo) k ~ ( x xl) ,& ~~ x ~

(x4) [(x4

x2)+

3 F(x4, xo)]

&

(x,) [(x5

E x3)+ 7 Fix 5.

~1)1}

The construction of F is much m o r e complicated and cannot be simply write down m!.n in the formal language of Z F the inductive definition of the set Ct A theorem similar t o VI can also be proved for s e t s L given here. However it does not require any new idea: we

r'

We shall use this fact later. The formula F can be called and absolute min definition of' C (or of L ). min It follows f r o m theorem VI that the c l a s s C possesses a min well ordering which is definable in C Hence the existence of a de=

finable well ordering of the universe is consistent with ZF. Addison and others who discussed the well ordering of C induced by the relation R~~~ These ideas'were further exploited by G'c'del, Kuratowski, min f l P(w) and proved that it is p r o j e c t h e of the

c l a s s PCAnCPCA. This result has numerous applications in proofs that various hypotheses of the descriptive set theory a r e consistent with ZF. Examples. Ordinal definable sets. This class was f i r s t di= scovered by Giidel who did not publish h i s r e s u l t s and then rediscovered by Scott and Myhill and some years afterwards, indipendently, by Vopenka and Hajek. in F r m We call a set x f Rr definable in R if t h e r e is a formula F r with exactly one f r e e variable x such that for every t in R
0

ar

A.

Mostowski

the conditions t e x and R r b F[{<o,

t>}]

a r e equivalent. A set x is

ordinal definable if t h e r e is an ordinal r such that x is definable in

Rr.

A s e t x is hereditarily ordinal definable if for every finite sequen= n

ce s such that s definable.

6
0

n-1

. . .sl
Dr+l -

so

x all the s e t s s a r e ordinal j

: x is ereditarily ordinal

We put D definable}

= 0,

{ x 6 Rr

, D~ = u ( D ~ r < s (s is a limit number). : )

It is obvious that D
: r < s)

Ds

= u { Dr

D for r < s , D is transitive and r s for limit numbers s. Since the operations A 1 - *12

lead from ordinal definable s e t s again t o such using theorem I that e l e r y s e t D Lemma

s e t s , we easily infer, ordinals such that

is predicatively closed.

There a r e a r b i t r a r i l y great

DrcD r + l .
of D

R and that each element r+l is hereditarily ordinal definable. Thus it remains to show that

Proof. It i s c l e a r that each D

there a r e arbitrarily great ordinals such that D is definable in R r r+l' To achieve this we f i r s t construct a formula which "says" that x is definable in R formulae: Ord(x ), Fnc(x 1, Dom(x2) = xo + 1, 0 2 (t)[(tcxO)-,cu){(<t+
( ( s. v> 9 '

Let B = B (xo, x2, x 3 , )

be the conjunction of the following

< 0, O>6 x2, (xo9 6 X2, 1, o fx ~ ) z ( v ) L ( v E u ) - ~ ( > e x 2 g l t <v.

X37
U>

(t) [ ( t ~ + 1) & Lim(t) -+ ( u ) [ ( < t, x0

C x2) 2 (Es)(Ev)

bs F t )

&

t x,) a, (u c v11j.J

Let C :x4 6 F r r n

be the formula (wjth the free variables x1,x3,x4)

) & ( ~ r ( x q ) = b ) ) & [(x5 t x L ~ ~ ( x 3 ! = x 4 (x5) Pr &(x5 x3)]

I < 0. {

x57)]

) k

It is not hard to show that if r

On, r f 0 and r is a limit

A:" Mostowski
number, then for a r b i t r a r y x, y, z, t , F in R valence a r e t r u e Rrb B If s R 0. x > , 4 2 , y) , the following equi=

4 3,

z>]]

(xC On) & (y is a function.

with domain x

10) ) & ( t = { u C z : Z ~ F L { C Ou ,, ) ] )
for arbitrary equivalence R ~ C A L { C Oa > , ,

< r , then Rr b (E! x2)(E! x3)B [ { ( 0, s > ) . ( c c[\( 1, t ) . C 3 , z ) , (4, F > ) ] :F C F r mPr ) & ( F r ( F ) =
It follows that if we put A = (ExZXEx3)(Ex4)

1) & (s) (s Gx) +(y(s)

= Rs) & (y(x) = 2)

LB
.

& C]

, then
r the

positive limit number r and a r b i t r a r y x, t in R

41, t>)]

( x t O n ) & ( t c R X ) & ( is t
X

definable in R )

F o r each ordinal r we denote by f ( r ) the supremum sup [g(x) : x e R ~ where g(x) is the l e a s t ordinal such that x is ) definable in R
X

o r 0 if such an ordinal does not exist. It is obvious but does not r+l Hence there a r e a r b i t r a r i l y great c r i t i c a l numbers of is definable in R

that the function f is continuous and non decreasing. It is even strictly increasing because each ordinal r is definable in R even belong to R f, i. e . ,

r' ordinals r which satisfy the equation f ( r ) = r. We claim

that if r is such a number, then D remarking that D over x

F i r s t of a l l , D r e Rr+l because D C R

by the definition of Dx+l and then summing x+l ,Rx r. We have still t o exhibit a formula G such that, for every

<

r - r'

r+l' this is proved by

X, ( x c D ~ ) R ~ + ~ c c 0, { > ) ] G ~ x

.
F u r t h e r m o r e from the definition

To establish the existence of this formula we notice that r and

a r e obviously definable in R

of D

r+l' we obtain the equivalences

A. Mostowski

(x DrI

; (Es)
03s) m

L(s(1-1

& ( X 6 DStl)]
(X

( E s ) [(s

c r) &

E Rs) & (x is hereditarily ordinal definable1

[ Is C r ) &

(x 6 R s ) & (u)(rn) [ ~ n ( u & )

(me W

) & (Dom(u) =
j

1) & (u(0) = x) & (i) L ( i

< m ) -t (u(i+l)F u(i))]

(u(m) is ordinal definable)) valence can obviously be limited t o R t e r m s belong

We now notice that the quantifier (u) in the part of the equibecause a finite sequence whose r' t o Rr is itself an element of R (the t e r m s of u belong

t o the "transitive closure" of x and hence to R u ( m ) u(m-1) t ~

since we assume that

1

.. . C

u(0) = x). It follows that we can replace in the

l e a s t part of the equivalence the expression '(u(m) is ordinal definable) by (u(m)6 R ) & (u(m) is ordinal definable).

A s we know 'ordinal definable' means (Et) [ (t t 011) & (u(m) is defina=

ble in R ~ ) ]

. However,

since u(m)

and r is a critical number of

f we s e e that the expression 'u(m) i s definable in R by '(t C r) & (u(m) is definable in R,)' and thus by Thus we finally obtain
(X

'

can be replaced

C Dr) 5 ( E s ) (s C r ) & (xG Rs)

& (u)(m) (u C Rr) & (m 6

(*, )

&

Fn(u) & (Dom(u) = m + l ) & ( L O , x > (v)(w)[(vGRr) & ( w E R r ) & ( ( i ,

-4W (

t u)

& (i)

c v)] j]

v ) c u) & ( < i + l , w > t u)

& (Y)((Y 6 R ~ & (( m , y ) )

( ~ t ) The lemma is thus ~ a r ~ v e d .

~ ~ n ( t& l & )

t u) --) ~ ~ t t dl. A [[LO.

).

This formula obviously entails the definability of D in R

f

>I]))]

r+l'

A s a c ~ r o l l . ~ t t o the above lemma we obtain .y

VII. (Scott - Myhill). The c l a s s D

=u{ Dr

: r(0n)

is a model of Z F

A. Mostowskj Proof. of s e t s D' In view of the lemma we can represent D a s a union

As we r e = which satisfy the condition D' D' r r+l' h(r) marked above, the s e t s D and hence the s e t s D' a r e predicatively x' r' closed, transitive and form an increasing sequence. Thc condition

= D

Db

=u {'%: '4

s }

is satisfied if s is a limit number since the s u =

premum of an increasing sequence of c r i t i c a l numbers f o r the function f is itself a critical number for f a r e satisfied in this case. If x D ,
is definable in R

Thus all assumption of theorem I1 such that x

then t h e r e is a smallest ordinal r = r

call it F set F r m

x '

Among formulae which define x in R t h e r e is one, r* r which occurs e a r l i e s t in a standard enumeration of the

which we must think of a s fixed a t the beginning of the Pr whole proof. Thus we have a one-one mapping x + ( r F ) of D into

x '

O YFrm n a set

pr' a t D is itself and element of D. F r o m this we infer VIII. Axiom of choice is valid in D. It is obvious that L

It is not difficult t o show that t h i s mapping r e s t r i c t e d t o

C V:

none of the equation L = D,

D = V can be proved o r disproved in ZF.

A.

Mostowski

This lecture will be based on axioms and shall compare various models

of M but will be devoted

to models of ZF. We shall introduce the notion of height and with of a model a s t o their height and width. By a model of Z F we mean in this lecture a transitive s e t of s e t s in which all axiom of Z F a r e true. It is obvious that the c l a s s of modelsof Z F can be defined by a predicative formula. Instead of transitive lemma provable in ZF. I ("contraction lemma"). If R is a well founded relation which satisfies the condition families of s e t s we could equally well

use a r b i t r a r y well founded relations.

This results from the following

f o r a r b i t r a r y u, v in the field of R , then R is isomorphic with the relation E in a transitive family of sets. The proof of this lemma is easy and will not be given here. The existence of models follows f r o m the Scott - Scarpellini theorem; this theorem shows for instance that t h e r e a r e ordinals r , s , such that L-( L, D < D
S

and R < R . t

Hence there a r e models of Z F

of the form L

r 2

Ds, Rt.

The question a r i s e s : a r e t h e r e model of Z F of any given c a r = dinality? The answer r e s u l t s easily f r o m the downward Skolem - L6= wenheim theorem:
1 . F o r every ordinal 1

ram

t h e r e is a model of power ( r )

elementarily equivalent with L. Proof. We s t a r t with a s e t of power

)r

, e. g., with r

A.

Mostowski

itself and consider an ordinal s (of any power) such that r C L F o r each F in F r m Pr with O E F r ( F ) , each infinite set a E L

L. s and each

<

sequence f in aFr(F' x in L
S

we denote by e (f) the earliest element F such that Ls )=F n 4 0 , x > ] v f l o r 0 if there is no such

- jo3

element. Furthermore we put a ' = {eF(f) : ( F f F r m

(f

ISaF r ( F ) - 2

01

Pr

) & (OPFr(F)) &

It is obvious that a 'a'

(consider the formula x 0 = x 1 ! )

and

that a and a' have the s a m e power ( F r m is denumerable and f ran= pr ges over the set of all finite sequences with t e r m s in a 1. Now we form the union a = Ua
= r and a = a ' - it is obvious that the 0 n+l n' power of a is Irl and that a<L. Finally we apply the contraction lem-

where a

ma I t o obtain the desired transitive set. A theorem s i m i l a r t o I1 can be proved for the c l a s s
D and

generally for every class which can be proved t o be well orderable. There a r e other proofs of the Skolem-LGwenheim theorem which allow us t o prove the existence of denumerable models which a r e ele= mentarily equivalent with any given model whether well orderable o r not.
1 1 F o r any model of Z F there exists an elementarily equiva1.

k n t denumerable model. Prosf. Let m be the given model. We shall say that a formula with exactly one f r e e variable x describes an ordi= I ' r 0 nal if the s e t SF(m, <O,x >f) is an ordinal. F o r each F with this property we consider a costant OF; m r e o v e r we consider denumerably many constants c . j = 0, 1, 2 , . These constants a r e added to the J' language of ZF: the formulas of the extended language a r e obtained from the formulae of the old language (i. e . , essentially from the elements of F r m Pr
) by substituting constants for some o r all free variables of

FE Frm

'

..

A.

Mostowski

the formulae. Let T be the s e t i F 6 F r r n call T "the theory of m".

: ( F r ( F ) = 0) & ( m k ~ )We may ; Pr Y Now we denote by T the s e t of sentences

of the extended language which can be derived from T and the following sentences: c = c ) where j j k which describes an ordinal. (

k,

(x0) ' i ( x O C o F ) z ~where F is a formula ]

We claimthat if F i s a formula (of the extended language) with F r ( F ) = I02 , then

(*

n: (x,)

[(0n(x0)+F(x0)]~ T % ~ G ~ $ ( o ~GT )

(4): x o ) ~ ( x o ) ~ ~ X e ( j ) OGT*( c1,. ) ( (~

JK

);

in the formula (*#) the l e t t e r 'G' ranges over formulae (of the primitive language) which describe ordinals. The implications from left t o right in both (+) and (X*) a r e obvious. The converse implication in the c a s e (*) can be proved by noti= cing that all the steps in a deduction of F ( c . ) from T can be repeated when c . is replaced by a variable not occurring in the given deduction.

The implication f r o m right t o left in @wt) c a n be proved a s fol=

lows. Write F(OG) a s F1(oG, c l .

..,

cn) where F' is a formula of the

primitive language, The constants OX different f r o m OG can obviously be eliminated by replacing then by t e r m s

f x:

Xjwhich in turn can be

eliminated because of their definability in the primitive language. F o r simplicity we assume that the variables x., i = 1, 2 , . in F ' . We denote by F " the. formula F 1 ( x XI, o,

...,xn) and

.. , n

do not appear by K the

s conjunction of formulae 7 ( x = x ) where 1 p < q 6 n. P q Using the deduction theyrem we can show that from a proof
of the formula F1(OG, c l , . obtain a proof of
(i) ixo)(xl).

.. ,

c ) from the assumption T we can n

..

(Xn)

Exo =

oG)

& K +F~I]

A.

Mostowski

from the s a m e assumption. T o s e e this i t is sufficient t o replace in the given proof all the constants c . by new variables and prefix

each formula which appears in the proof with the conjunction of ine= q u a l i t i e s l ( x = x ) where p f q and x and x range over the varia; P q P q bles which were used t o replace the constants c j' It follows now that f o r each formula G which describes an ordinal the formula (of the primitive language) x 0

((t)[ ( t t x O ) t ~ ( t ) ]& K .+Ft')

i s t r u e in m and hence belongs t o T. We choose for G the formula G which describes the folloz 0 wing ordinal r: if there is an ordinal s such that m EX,). (Exn)K &f F" 0, s.111, then r = s +1 where s is the 0 0 least such ordinal; otherwise r = 0. The formula G can be written 0 explicitely:

..

u<

(The formula inside square brackets has the f r e e variable 1 ~ ' ; since we

' we had t o add the 0 outer quantifier (Ey) and the equation (y = x ) at the end in o r d e r 0 t o have the f r e e variable x ). 0 The formula (i) with G replaced by G is thus provable. 0 Since this formula implies the formula
must insist that the free variable should be 'x
F

(x0) [On(xo) + (x,)

(+t ).

.,... (x,)(Kf

F t t j , we

obtain the left hand side of under=

In the further course of the proof we use ideas which lie the proof of the completeness theorem. We

consider the Boolean

A.

Mostowski

algebra of formulae of the extended language and denote by B the quotient algebra obtained by the division by the f i l t e r T mulae ( * )
I

* . The

for=

and (F*) prove that t h e element (Ex ) F I T is the Boolean 0 join of the element F(c.)/T* and t h e element (Exo) [0n(x0) dl J t h e Boolean join of t h e element F ( 0 ) / T G By the Rasiowa - Sikorski l e m m a t h e r e is a maximal f i l t e r .

*.

is

T*~T*

which p r e s e r v e s these joins.

We define a relational s y s t e m c . and R is the r e l a =

L C , R > where C is the s e t of all the constants tion which holds between c and c

is an element of T *

.c ~ j k J k It i s well known that a l l sentences of T**

if and only if t h e formula c

and hence those of T a r e t r u e in t h i s relational system. We now prove that the relation R is well founded. Let us denote by H the formula which defines the relation e x p r e s s H a s follows:

"r is the rank of x ! '

(ExZ)(Ex3)

Formally we

x2. x3) & (xl S x3) & ( y ) ( z ) ( t )[ ( y e x0) & B(y, 2, t ) ~ t ) ] )

111

-+- -(x1
H(v, x)+

where B is the formula defined on p. On(v),

The formulae

(x)(E!v) H(v, x , )

(x e y ) & H(v, x ) & H(w, ;y)--+(v

e w)

a r e provable in ZF. It follows that f o r every j the formula

belongs t o T *

J and hence t h e r e is a f a - m u l a G. which describes an J ordinal and which has the properties that the formulae H(OG , c . ) and J j (++*I ( c . e c k ) 3 (OG. 0 1 J J Gk
#

(EV) [ ~ ( v c . ) & on(v)] ,

belong t o T

Let r . be the ordinal described by G. and l e t j, k be such J J

A.

Mostowski

that c .Rek. J In o r d e r t o prove that R is well founded i t will be sufficient t o pro= Assume t h e contrary. It follows that ve that r c r J k' and hence the formula
O G 3 OG. is in T
4

m q x : ~ ~ ( ~ f x : ~ j

. This however

is impos=

sible because the formula

(ii*+)l e a r l y c

implies that 7 ( 0 T , OG ) Gk j

belongs t o T

** .
foundedness of the relation R being established we may

The well

use theorem I and obtain the desired model. The above proof does not work i n the non denumerable c a s e because no analogue of t h e Rasiowa Definition.

Sikorski l e m m a is then available.

We c a l l a height of a model m the l e a s t ordinal

2

not in m; we s a y that a model m l is b r o a d e r than m

at t h e level r

where r is an ordinal if m A R 2 m n R 1 r 2 r Example. The natural models have the l a r g e s t possible b r e a d t h . The f i r s t r e m a r k is obvious and the second follows f r o m the existence of the formula F alluded to in t h e o r e m VI of l e c t u r e 1 1 1. It follows f r o m the properties of this formula that whenever m is a model and r &On* m, then then

TinS

Hence if h is the height of m, min m; i t can be shown that C - Lh. h IV (Cohen - Shepherdson). T h e r e is a minimal model (i.e . ,

CinE r. n

one which is contained in any model). T h i s follows f r o m the example above. equal. t o the f i r s t L which is a model of ZF. The minimal model is

V. If m i s a model , then s o is m nL. We omit the detailed proof of this theorem. Essentially it can be established a s follows: The proof that L is a model of Z F

is based

A.
on the fact that a l l axiom of Z F a r e valid in the universe.

Mostowski

Relativi=

sing t h i s proof t o m we obtain that a l l t h e s e axioms a r e valid in the domain of constructible elements of m. In view of t h e example above t h i s domain is m n L . Theorem V shows that the height of an a r b i t r a r y model is a t the s a m e time the height of not true. a constructible model. The converse is

E. g., the height of a natural model is always non - denume=

r a b l e because e v e r y such model contains non denumerable well o r d e = r i n g s and each such ordering i s s i m i l a r t o an ordinal which belongs t o the model. On the other hand t h e r e a r e denumerable constructible models. In lectureVII we shall construct examples of denumerable models of equal heights but of different breadths. Such models are of p a r a =

mount importance f o r various independence proofs. T h e i r existence c a n best be established by means of the notion of forcing introduced by Cohen. However we shall not deal with t h i s notion here. Instead we s h a l l d i s c u s s another problem which i s much m o r e special but interesting and, a s we shall s e e , f a r f r o m trivial. We put L* = L ~ ~ \ R , + ~ It is obvious that L I L for . r s +fr 5 s c o n and hence t h e r e is a s m a l l e s t ordinal c such that L is constant from c on

. We want

estimate the s i z e of c.

We note in passing that the s a m e problem c a n a l s o be f o r = mulated for the f a m i l i e s L O R where k'>W+1. S m a l l e r values of r k k a r e not interesting because L A R is certainly constant from n r = W on if n <

@.

Estimates of c f r o m below. L e t u s c a l l a model m constructiz ble if t h e r e i s an ordinal r such that L

= m; the ordinal

r is called

the index of m. It can be shown that the index of a constructible mo= del is equal to i t s height. VI. c i s g r e a t e r than the index of t h e minimal model.

Proof. Let the index of the minimal model be i and the index of the next model in the sequence L 'there is a constructible
X

be j.

Then the sentence

model of Z F '

is t r u e in L.. Since the ~kolem-LbiYenheim theorem is provable in J Z F (cf. the proof of t h e o r e m I11 above) we infer that the sentence ' t h e r e i s a denumerable constructible model of Z F 1 i s t r u e in L.. Hence t h e r e i s a s e t x in L . which satisfies in L . the J J J fo.-mula 'Y i s a denumerable model of Z F ' . Such a set must be a model of Z F because the relation of satisfaction and the c l a s s of axioms of Z F a r e absolutely definable. Since L . contain just one model of Z F , 3 x mu'st be equal t o this unique model i. e. , t o Li. Hence L- contains a function which maps L (i i i s an element of L. we infer that i i s denumerable in L . and J hence t h e r e is a set X of integers such that X E L . and 'the relation J m i s of the o r d e r type i. It follows that f m, n 7 : 2 (2n - 1) e X onto
G)

and is one-one.

Since each ordinal

e L?

otherwise i would be an element of i. i In o r d e r to obtain a stronger e s t i m a t e f o r c we introduce

but

$ I ,* bccause

the Definition. A positive ordinal r is called L-definable if there

is a predicative fa-mula F with F r ( F ) =

and L
ihsi LSl=F[{CO.x>j]

101such

that whenever r & L suc:h

is a model of Z F , then r is the unique element of L

while O i s a unique such element if r f L s of Z F (compare a s i m i l a r notion of R

and L

i s a model

defina=

bility which we

introduced in lecture 11).

A.

Mostowski

VII. If r is L - definable and L

is the r - t h t e r m of the s e =
c 7 s.
1

quence of the constructible models , then

Proof. Let F be a formula which L - defines r and let L. and

L . be the r + 1st and r+2 nd t e r m s of the transfinite sequence which J contains all cunstructible models. We consider t h e following sentence H:
( E X ~ ) ( E ~ ) ( ( X ~ 0) & On(xo) & ( x O cx l ) & i z e x 1 ) & ( x I ~ ~ [ ~ ~ o . x O) 7 j ] i
& ( t ) ( u ) ( < t , u > c z ) + (u is a constructi= 0 ble model of Z F ) & (vliw) ~ ) < V , W ) ~ Z ) ( t k v ) 4 ( w E u ~ $ ) &

& F n ( z ) & (Dom(z) = x )

H " s a y s t t that xl contains a sequence of constructible mo=

dels of Z F ordered in type r by the r e l a t i o n c . Of c o u r s e the f o r = malization of H given above i s not complete: expressions 'is a con= structible model', ' F n ( z ) ' e t c . have t o be written exclusively in t e r m s

of the primitive notions of ZF. Such a complete formalization of H is easily obtainable.

Since r B L . e L . and the s e q u e n c e t < x , l l : x belongs 1 J t o L. we easily s e e that L . ~ ( E X L(x1 i s a model of Z F ) & ~ ) J We now use the Skolem-Lb'wenheim theorem which a s we know is

.-

rl

HI .

provable in Z F and hence valid in L.. We obtain the result that L contains an element y which is denumerable in of y onto formula 'x
J J

j L . (i. e . , a mapping J integers e x i s t s in L . ) and which has the property that the

i s a constructible model of Z F ' & H is satisfied in L . by 1 J y ( m o r e exactly: by the sequence i d , y > ) ) . It follows t h a t y is a con= f o r s o m e t. Hence j > t . Since L s a = t t t i s f i e s H in L . we infer using the definition of L - definability that L structible model of Z F , y = L
J

t of ZF. Hence t a i .
F r o m the

contains a s element a sequence of type r of constructible models

r
inequalities j > t > i it obviously follows that

A.

Mostowski

and therefore the s a m e is j t r u e of r . Now the proof can be brought t o an end in the s a m e way t = i. Hence L. is denumerable in
1

a s in VI. The notion of L - definability is closely connected with the notion of strong definability which was discussed in a paper by the present writer. It follows f r o m the result of this paper that L finable ordinals a r e

de=

4 d1' Thus if r is the f i r s t ordinal which is

not strongly definable, then c 3 r . Most problably still stronger evalua= tions of c from below a r e possible. Estimate of c from above. We shall sh0.w that c S Ul. The proof is based on a device invented by VIII. ( ~ G d e l ' slemma). If x /RU Proor. Let r be such that x e L We consider the relational system (L the Skolem-Lvwenheim that m is GSdel in his' proof that the and x e L, then x e L w and L continuum hypothesis is valid in the model L. 1' is a model of ZF.

>. By an application of r' theorem we obtain a structure <m, G> such belong t o rn and < m , &><<L
r r

denumerable, x and R a

F r o m theorem VI of lecture I11 we know that t h e r e exists a formula F E Frm with two f r e e variables xO,xl such that for an a r b i t r a r y Pr model N of Z F and every ordinal s in OnON, and every u E N

The following sentence which e x p r e s s e s the fact that every set belongs t o one of the s e t s LT, is evidently t r u e in the s t r u c t u r e Hence this sentence is t r u e in the s t r u c t u r e (m, 6,whence we

infer that for every y in m t h e r e is an s f and an xf such that s f and

A. Mostowski

x' belong t o m

and : m k F [~CO,S'>

mk0rd[i<0,s1>]]

cl.xt>]],

y & x'.

The element s t is not necessarily an ordinal since m is not necessarily transitive; similary x' need not be equal t o an L Contracting m t o a
iC

v transitive s e t m k w e obtain a model of ZF; and xTwhich s a =

the element s' and x' a r e contracted t o elements s tisfy formulae s i m i l a r t o those above but with m It follows that s refore m*s~&sx: contracting function is a n ordinal and x

replaced by m4

s * m% On ~

*=

Ls+

. Hence

ycLE;* and the-

Lt

. The

ordinal t is denumerable

because m S f i s denumerable.

Since x is transformed into itself by the

we infer that x G L c L tY' F r o m G6de11s lemma we immediately obtain

M. c SO1.
Remark. If the formula (i) were t r u e in V , we would ob= viously have L L,J
Y

1' Since the assumption that (i) i s t r u e in V is consistent with the

1

= R

and hence c would be equal t o

axioms of Z F we infer that s o is the assumption c = W1. A construction of Rowbottom. Scott was the f i r s t t o prove that the existence of very l a r g e cardinals implies the existence of s e t s which a r e not constructible. Gaifman improved his result by showing that the existence of measurable cardinals implies the denumerability of L n R d + l , i. e., below. the inequality c (dl. An independent proof of reproduce it

this result was also obtained by Rowbottom and we shall

Rowbottom's result is even stronger than that of Gaifman because assumption

he does not assume the existence of measurable cardinals but makes a much weaker We denote by

I AJ

.
the family

3 Z CA

: Z\ = n j

Definition. We s a y that a cardinal r satisfies the partition

A. property r -+(dl) (or

Mostowski

for short the property ( R ) ) if the following n

is true: f o r every set U of power r and e v e r y denemerable family f of mappings: fn :

J un ~

(n = l t ~ 1;2;,

...)

there is a s e t X C U of power # that fn(a) = g(n) for every a in

{XI

and a function g:

&+al such

and every integer n 3 1 .

We call X the s e t of indiscernibles for the family f

n' Before we define a particular family which shall be used in Lemmal. If s On

the proof we establish the and a is a finite sequence whose elements a r e constructible sets, then the s e t t(a) =
is

f ~1~

constructible.

r m ( F r ( F ) = Dom(a) & (Ls : Pr

FFl a ]

)I

Proof. Since L is a model of Z F t h e r e exists in L a s e t of all F ' s which satisfy in L the formula obtained by expressing in the language of Z F the condition ( F r ( F ) = Dorn(a)) & (Ls+ coincides with t(a). We call t ( a ) the type of a. Lemma 1 implies that the type of a sequence whose t e r m s a r e constructible s e t s is itself construeti= ble. We shall call types t ( a ) of sequences with constructible elements
F
).

Because of the absoluteness of this formula we infer that this s e t

type. F o r each finite s e t a with constructible elements we denote

by t l ( a ) the index (in the transfinite sequence of all elements of L ) of the type t ( a l ) where a ' is the sequence with the range a and with t e r m s arranged in an increasing order; the ordering relation is that of the natural ordering of L.

A. Mostowski with the property 0 (R) and put f (a) = t f ( a ) for each a in { L ~ n. Hence f maps n n 0 {Lro into and since L h a s power r we obtain a s e t X of 1 r 0' 0 power W1 and a function g: &+& which satisfy the equation 1 t l ( a ) = g(n) for e v e r y a in We a s s u m e the existence of a cardinal r

In

fxIn .
YCY

Lemma 2. If a c l a s s K has a well ordering which is defi= nable in K and if Y is a subclass of. K, then elements definable i n the s t r u c t u r e (K, relation f o r m a c l a s s D which satisfies the

,y)

D-(

K.

Proof. All we need t o show is the following: if F F r m 0 E F r ( F ) and a

DFr(F' -

Io1 , then

from K + ( E X ~ ) F

follows that there is an element b in D such that K i i F L l < O , b > ] By assumption t h e r e is a b in K which satisfies this condition and

1] a

it

pr' a3

since a well ordering of K is definable in K, the f i r s t element of K which satisfies the condition stated above is belongs t o D. We apply the lemma t o the c a s e where K = L
Y = X.

definable in K and hence

The set D is a non

Lr

By contraction we obtain a transitive set B which is a model 0 of ZF. Let u+uf be the contracting function. If a ' a n d a a r e twt, * increasing sequences whose common domain is 51,2,. whence L r k F [ a ] = ~ ~ k =F La*] 0 0 F r ( F ) = 11,2,. an f o r each F in F r m
F

and 0 denumerable model of Z F since s o is

..,n]
Pr with

and whose

t e r m have the form uf where u e X , then obviously t f ( a ) = tf(a*)

.. 3.

with s s To prove this we denote by F the absolute definition of L We shall now prove that B h a s the form L

1'

A.

Mostowski

(cf. theorem VI in lecture 111) and notice that for every x in L there is an ordinal r in OnAL XEL~, i.e., L Lr

b F[[C 4 l,x>l]. Hence 0 (x2)(Exo)(Exl) p r d ( x O ) & F & ( x 2 c xl)] The s a m e formula

r O,r>O,

such that

ro

0 true in B which implies that for e v e r y x in B there is an ordinal

is
= L

r in B satisfying the condition x

S

r'

Hence B =

where s is the height of B. Since B is not denumerable, we

q~~ E O ~ ~ B Z = : ~

obtain s

34.
Now we notice that x L A R implies x e L Thus if x c L * ~ 1 then x = u' f o r some

s' u in D. Since u is definable in the s t r u c t u r e

(cf. VIII) and hence x~ L

< Lr

,E , y)
y'

yeX,

the element u' = x is definable in the s t r u c t u r e

<#, a ,

> EX.-

Denoting by G the formula which defines x we infer that x is the unique element of B which satisfies the condition ( m ex ) s ~ t = G f i c n > 0. elements of Thus an integer y i ( i = 1, 2,.

.<

1. yi,

.....

, y;,I]

; h e r e Y'i a r e all

{u' : U G X ~ which occur in the definition of x. m belongs t o x if and only if m together with the

.. ,n) satisfy G in B.

We can write this result in a m o r e conspicuous way if we (x ) a formula which says that the m-th integer belongs m 0 C (x ) is the formula t o x (e. g. C (x ) is the formula OE x 0 0 0 0' 1 0 { 0 E xOetc. ). We obtain then me
X=B(=

denote by C

EX^)

G & c,(x,)

i { ~ l . ~ i ,

,...,<nsy;>$

Since the elements y! a r e indiscernibles and since we can obviously assume that they form an increasing sequence we i n f e r that the right hand side of this equivalence does not depend on the particular choice

.A. Mostowski

of these indiscernibles but only on G and m. Thus each r in L''&+~

is determined by a formula and consequently there are only denume=
k

rably many elements in L

which proves that c

< 3.

A.

Mostowski

Lecture

V In o r d e r t o establish the independence of various set-theore=

tical hypotheses from the axioms of Z F Scott introduced a new

kind

of models which a r e completely different f r o m the ones considered thus far. His construction is closely connected with ideas due So Cohen who f i r s t established these indipendence result. Cohen used for this purpose the notion of forcing. Scott's methods a r e much e a s i e r t o deal with. A construction equivalent t o that of Scott was a l s o de= veloped by Vopenka. The present lecture a s well a s the t h r e e lectu= r e s which follow a r e based on lectures given by Scott in the Summer School on Set Theory in Los Angeles (1967). The main idea of Scott /and Vopenka/ is the use of many valued logic. Instead of the Boolean algebra shall consider an a r b i t r a r y complete Boolean algebra B. Instead of s e t s we shall consider functions with values in B; s e t s of s e t s will be replaced by functions with values in B whose arguments a r e fun= ctions of the same character. By induction we define a c l a s s of these functions which is stratified in a similar way a s the universal c l a s s V. Elements of this class a r e objects which will be used to interpret the basic notion of "set". Under this interpretation each set-theoretic f o r = mula has a value which is an element of B. We shall show that all theorems of Z F have the value 1. Thus a formula whose value for some algebra B is not 1 is independent f r o m the axioms We denote the basic operation of B by bly with the index B. The elements

iO , 1 J

of truth values we

+,

., - with

subsript

B if necessary. Infinite m e e t s and joins a r e denoted b y r a n d

,x ,

and

zxEB

2 possi=

x a r e den0 =

A. Mostowski

ted by 0 and 1. We a l s o put x+y

-x+y and x*

y = (x-+y). ( y - 3 ~ ) .

We always assume that B is complete. The axiomatic basis for all what follows is the s e t theory

M together with the axiom of choice although most of the theorems can
be proved already in Z F provided that we add t o it the axiom of choice. We denote by B ' the c l a s s of functions f in V whose range is SB. We call Dom(f) the support of f. We now define "partial uni= B v e r s e s " V which correspond t o our f o r m e r R The definition is r. B by induction: V- is the class of all B-valued functions whose domains B a r e subsets of 'uLV: : s<r] F o r r = 1 the only element of V 1 is the "void" function 0. The union of all partial universes will be B denoted by V

The basic semantical notions We introduce, in analogy t o what we did in lecture I the notion of satisfaction. Since we a r e now dealing with many valued logic /elements of B playing the rDle of truth values/ we shall have not the division of formulae in those which a r e satisfied by a sequence and those which a r e not satisfied by this sequence but a m o r e complicated partition of formulae into s e t s of formulae which a r e satisfied by a given sequence with a degree b where b e B. In other words we shall define a B-valued function S B whose arguments range over the c l a s s

10, a >
KF(a)]

: (F

F r m ) & (a E ( v ~ ) ~ ' ( ~ ) ) Scott writes ]

for S B ( F , a )

. If F r ( F ) consists
r

of one integer n, then we a>]).

shall often wiite SB(F, a) instead of

s~(F,{ <n,

The definition of SB proceeds by induction and consists of two parts, one dealing with atomic formulae and another with formu= l a e involving logical operators.

A.

Mostowski

Definition of S (F, a) for the case where F contains logi=

cal operations. We put

Definition of S (F, a) for atomic formulae. We f i r s t defi= B B B ne two auxiliary functions E, I which map V X V into B. Let us assume that these functions a r e already defined on the s e t
( { U V ~:

s ~ 1 - 1and~let a, )

bea pair which belongs to(

(: v

ssr] )2

but not t o the former set. We put

This is

clearly an inductive definition of the s o r t which can axioms of M. Hence we can assume

be formalised on the basis of We now put

that there exist functions E, I which satisfy the above equations.

sBbi =
s,(xi

j'

i<i, a

>, < j ,
=

b 7 ) I(a. b) for 1 =

#
#

j,

sB(xi = xi. )<i. a>])

sB(c l ( x i ) , j < i , a > ] )

= 1,

6 x i
j'

>. <j.
=

b 71) E(a, b) for i =

j,

SB(xiexi,i<i, Remark. If we

a> { )

0 .
that

formalise the construction in the system

ZF we obtain two formulae E f ( a , b, x) and If(a, b, x) such

A. it is provable in Z F that for a r b i t r a r y a, b in V B

Mostowski

t h e r e is exactly

one x such that E f ( a , b, x) and exactly one y such that I1(a, b, y). Denoting these unique elements by E(a, b) and I(a, b) we can prove inductive equations f o r E and I. In this case we cannot define a fun= ction which could p l a y the role of SB; we even cannot define a f o r = mula S f (F, a, x) f o r which it would be provable that for a r b i t r a r y B F in F r m and a n a r b i t r a r y a in (V ) Fr(F) t h e r e is exactly one x in

B and which would have the property that if this unique x is denoted by equation given in the f i r s t p a r t of the SB(F, x), then the inductive
definition will be provable. However we can define S ( F , x) f o r each B explicitly given formula F. If we work in the system GB, then E and I can be defined but again there is no possibility of defining the function S generally. B Validity. A formula F will be called B-valid if S (F, a ) = 1 B B Fr(F) f o r every a i n (V )

Submodels. Any class The satisfaction function

wCvB

is called a Boolean submodel.

a submodel is defined a s follows. If F B~ Fr(F) isan atomic formula, then S (F, a ) = S (F, a) f o r e v e r y a in W I 3 B W If F is not an atomic formula, then the value of S ( F , a) is defined B by induction in the s a m e way a s the function S with the only change B that in the c a s e of the formilla (x.)F the domain of variability of "x"
1

sWof

is restricted t o W. Elementary submodels. We call Wf an elementary submodel W' W of W if S (F, a ) = S (F, a) for a n a r b i t r a r y F in F r m and a in B B WfFr(F). Tarski's test. If for e v e r y F with 0 E F r { F ) and for an a r b i t r a r y sequence a in

w ' ~ ~- ('the~ )

following equation holds:

A.

Mostowski

then W' is an elementary

submodel of W.

In particular, if W' is a submodel of W and f o r every F in F r m such that O c F r ( F ) and every a in W lFr(F) there is an W x in W' satisfying the equation S ( F , akJf<0, x ) = B a "{< 0 , x > p , then W' is an elementary submodel of W.

I0.I

>]

Proof. is practically the same a s in the two-valued c a s e . We shall l a t e r develop the must sematincs of Boolean models but B' f i r s t esthblish some obvious properties of the function S

Theorems 1 - 4 below a r e s o obvious that no proof is needed. 1. If F E F r m and F' results f r o m F by a c o r r e c t substitution, then the validity of F implies that of F'. 2. If F , G @ r m and if the formulae F, F.+G then s o is G.
3. If F , G ~ F r m ,i# F ~ ( F and the formula F 4 G is va= )

a r e valid

lid; then s o is F+(x.)G.

1

4. Axioms of the propositional logic and of quantifier logic a r e valid. 5. I(a, a ) = 1. Proof by induction. Let us assume that the theorem is t r u e B for aEu{v: : r ~ s and l e t aeV - U~V: : r <s} ] The element s I(a, a) is the Boolean product of two identical elements

x (Dom(a) [a(x)" clearlygrx

D

Ti

>:Dom(a) @y).
{a(x)+p(x). ~ ( ~ )

I(x, y g I(x, x)])

1 . This latter element is

CDom(a) a(x)

whence by using the indueti=

ve assumption we obtain that this element is a(x,3 = 1

1:

A. Mostowski
6. I(a, b) = I(b, a).
Proof. Proof obvious.

7. I(a, b). I(b, c ) S I ( a , c). Obvious Boolean calculation r e ~ d u c ethe statement t o

I(a. b). I(b, c). a(x)

c C ~ k~y ) . ~ ~ j f~r xEDom(a).) ( I(x, y o ( ~

I(x, z)] whence by multiplying both sides by E(y). ~ ( yz, d we I(x, z). I(y,

Write this formula f o r short H S C . It is c l e a r that

H'Z:

E Dom(b)

[b(z).

I(b, c ) and noticing that I(b, c). b(z)< obtain H S

'

g Dom(b)

C y 6 Dom(c) p y ) .

Now we use 6 and obtain Hz<

GCDomrb) Ly
7

2 . 0
I(x,
1).

EDqm(c)[c(y).

The r e s t of the proof. follows by induction: if the t h e o r e m is t r u e f o r < x , y. Z>EU{V;

: r< s]

and (a,

b,

~>&@f

: 1-5s

$I3,

then the above inequality implies

Proof. The left-hand side is

SC

G D o m ( x ) [ ~ ( ~ ) .I(Z, a). ~ ( a ,b)]

whence by 7 the left-hand side is 5

zz

@(z). I(Z, b)] = E(b, x).

9. I(a, b). E(x, a ) & E(x, b).

Proof. The left-hand side is = I(a, b).

I(X>

ug5 ZU
7

&u c D o m ( a ) [a(U).
VJ))S

Dom(a) (a(u). ~ ( x ,u). v EDom(b) [a(u).

1 a(u)+zv

dDom(b) ~ b ( v ) . 1 ,

zu C v

c Dom(a) z

b(v). I(X, u). I(U, v j ,

c Dom(b)[b(v).

I(x, v ) j = E(x, b).

'

10. E(a, a ) = 0

A. Mostowski

Proof by induction. We assume the theorem for elements in

U{vB r

: r 4 sf

B and let a EVs. From the definition we obtain

E(a' a) =x'

eDom(a) Hence E(a, a ) E(x, x) and by the inductive assumption we obtain

because a(x) , E(x, a) for each x Dom(a). L

zxeDom(a)
{if , then

E(a, a) = 0 . 11. Lemma on extensionality. If F E F r m , ieFr(F), B Fr(F) aE(V )

I(x, y). SB(F, a ~ { < i . x 7 ] ) 5 s B ( ~ . a ~ { i i ,Y>$)

.
10.

Proof. F o r atomic formulae the lemma follows from 5 number of logical operators. 12. Lemma on bounded quantifiers. If F 6 F r m j f k r ( ~ ) . a#(v B Fr(F)
)
& F ]

F o r compound formulae we obtain it immediately using induction on the IeFr(F),

{if, then
a

r EX,) pie x j )

q.4,x> [ ) CueDom(x)
=

c.

pr '

(F,

au{<i, Proof. The left-hand side i s =

U s V ~ IsB@.

u.3

).

x(ui]

~ u I c ~ 8).E(u, u .
I(U.

x)]

and hence i s b t h e

right-hand side. On the other hand, the left-hand side i s equal t o

p v ZzeDom(x) [x(z). ~

z).

s B ( ~ .UI i a ~
z>])

z>j1 ,

JL

ZuG

v & EDom(x) [ ~ ( z ) . s B ( ~ .v {ti, ~ a

Embedding of V into

= RHS

vB.

If B t is a complete subalgebra

A. Mostowski

of B then, clearly,

vB1is

B a submodel of V

. In particular
v

we can of V

select f o r B1 a two-element algebra. We shall define a map into

vB'
R

s<r

w
4

s : x E a) and with value 1.

and assume that x is defined for x in s We denote by B a function with domain

: Let a E R p

- s0 er

We shall prove by induction the following Theorem 12. The following implications hold for arbitrary a, b in V:

(i) (a = b) -+I(a, (iii) (a f b) tiv) (a#b)

%'v
d

b) = 1,

(ii) (a E b) + E(a, b) = 1,

~ E ( X = g)

+I(Z

%) = 0

O. b > be a pair in ( U{V; : r < s ) )

V

Assume that these formulas a r e valid for pairs in

(

(J{v:

:r

<s

) 2 and let (a,

which does not belong to the

previous set.
v

Formula (i) is obvious in view of 5. If a c b , then a E Dom(b) and

b(x) = 1 whence we obtain (ii). Assume that a f b and x e a

v Hence x b ~om(aV) and

:(a

b.

y f x whence by inductive assumption I(y, x) = 0.Hence v v v v b(z). I(z, x) = 0 whence I: (, b) = 0. If a 4 b, then n z e Dom(b) a f x for every x in b whence by (iii) J(a, x) = 0 for every x in Dom(b) and therefore E(a, b) = 0. Note: the mapping a& i s not a mapping onto because fun= ctions which a r e not constant d9 not belong to its range. F r o m (i) - (iv) and the lemma on bounded quantifiers we ob= tain by induction the following
V

= 1 and for every V v

in

om(%)

we have

A. Theoreml3. If F e F r m SB(F, a) = 1 i f
-4

Mostowski

VFF

Pr ~ ~ Sg(F, and ]

and a G i ~ ~ ~ ( ~ ) , then

= 0 if

v ~ ~ .F H

i s essential for the va= Pr lidity of this theorem; it is not true, in general, for arbitrary f o r = Note. The assumption that F E F r m mulae F in F r m . Complete homomorphism. Let h map B onto a Boolean We algebra B' and preserve all finite and infinite meets and joins. call such a mapping a complete homomorphism.
A complete homomorphism h : B-+B'

determines a mapping Let us assume that but t

f = f :

vB-vB'
: r

which is defined by induction.

f i s already defined on

a$u@fl is

<

1.

~ { v :Fr< s] and let a CV;

s

Hence s i s a successor.

+1

and

Dom(a)S V{Vr : r & t 3 f(x) : x

We define f(a) a s a function whose domain

~ o m ( a ) ]and whose value for the argument z~ Dom(f(a))

We shall prove the following result:

14 (Lemma on complete homomorphism). If F E F r m and

a( ( v B ) ~ ~then ) , ( ~ h(SB(F, a)) = SBv

(F, f o a)

Proof. We first prove the lemma for the case where F i s an atomic formula and then for the case where F has logical ope=

rators. Case I. It will be sufficient to prove the equation: h(EB(a, b)) = EB' (f(a), f(b)), h(IB(a, b)) = IB,(f(a), f(b)). We use transfinite induedon and assume that (a. b>~(Vb::

r s s { )2
pairs in

- ("{v; ( v -)v?

: r<s : r

1 )2

and also that the lemma is t r u e for From the definitions and the assumption

< s 5 12.

that h is complete we obtain

A.

Mostowski

(where the dots stand for an expression resulting from the one written above by transposing a with b and x with y). We can replace the pro=

and similary the sum

y c Dom(b) by

Ct G Dom(f(b))

(y eDom(b) & (f(y) = t)'

In this way we obtain

The proof for E is similar; [h(b(x)) h(IB(a, x)j] =

( f ( b ) ) ( z l * ~ ~ , ( f s ) , = EB,(f(a), f(b)). Case I1 . i t will be sufficient t o discuss only the case where
F = (xi) G and i

TIxeVh S B 4 G . f o a u I < i ,
vB

h(Sg(F,a))

=ITxeVB

Fr(G). By definition h(SB ( G , au{<i, x>] )) =

f<(x)>l)S
273 )
=

KzG V ~ SB~(G,f o a q < i , ?

maps

SB.(F, f o a).

In order to establish the inequality ) / w e must show that f B' onto vB* This we do again by induction. Let a t e V r+l'

F o r every z1 in Dom(al) there is a z in V : Let a have the domain {z e V :

such that f(z) = a'.

: f ( z ) Domial) ~

J and

let a(z) be an

A. Mostowski

elemeqt of B such that h(a(z)) = at(f(z)). We easily prove that f(a) = a'. Automorphisms. A special case of the lemma on complete homomorphism is the following Theorem 15. If h i s an automorphism of B, FG F r m , a e then h(SB(F, a ) ) = SB(F, f o a ) where f is determined by h a s above. Corollary 16. If F r ( F ) = 0, then S ( F ) is invariant with B aspect t o all automorphisms of B. If h is an automorphism, then f is one-to-one. definition f(x) can be simplified: (f(x))(z) = h(x(f-'(a))). Theorem 17 (The maximum principle). If F e F r m , 0 E F r ( F ) , ~ E ( VFR(F); then there is an element x in 1 SB((Exo)F, a ) = SB(F, a u { < 0 , x.>i). Hence the

vB such

that

Proof. Put S ( F , ~ u { c o , u > ] ) = f(u). F r o m the lemma on B extensionality we infer that I(x, u). f(u)_Lf(x)for arbitrary u and x. Foy each a in the range of f we denote by ordinal r such that there a r e u in be a the set of these u.. We can assume that for all a in Rg(f) and all u in Qa the domain Dom(u) is one and the same. This follows from the remark that i f Dom(u) = c and c c c ' , then the element u' defi= ned by the equationsDom(ut) = c', ut(x) = u(x) for x 6 c and
u'(x) = 0 for x e c t

vB for r

the least which f(u) = a. Let Q

c,satisfies the equation I(u, u') = 1. In the situation

Thus in all Boolean equations u can be replaced by u'. which we a r e now considering we put d = u { ~ o m ( u ) :

( u 6 Qa) & ( a Rg(f)) and replace each u in Qa by u' whose domain

A.

Mostowski

is d and whose values on Dom(u) coincide with those of u and a r e 0

outside Dom(u). The set of we put Q =U{Q, to Q is equal to Rg(f).

modified elements we call again Q and a : a e R g ( f ) J . The range of the function f restricted

Now we use axiom of choice 2nd find a function g : Q - + B such that g(ul).g(u") which

zu
=

g(u)

zU f(u) C eQ
=

Rg(f) x

such that (E. g. we can well

0 f o r u' f u" and g ( u ) 5 f ( u ) f o r u e Q .

=

order Q and put g(u) precede u.)

f(u)

- zf(v)

where v ranges over elements

We define an element x of Dom(x) = d, x(t)

vB by

and claimthat this is the required element.

=aCb ( u ) u ( t ) l for t e d u Q

In order to show this it i s sufficient t o prove that

(*)

g(u)<I(x, u) for each a in Rg(f) and u in Qa. Assume for a moment that ( + ) has been proved. On the one it follows

hand it i s immediate that f(x)SSB((Exo)F, a). On the other from ( f ) that

and hence f ( x ) 3 SB((Exo)F, a).

uQ

g(u) =

zu

EQf(~) =

zu

Rg(f)U

The inclusion (*) I , u),

is proved by the following calculations:

Let a E Rg(f) and u E Qa; from the definition of E it follows

TT,,

[-x(t) + du)]

and from the definition of x

A.

Mostowski

NOW

we notice that - g ( v ) 2 g ( u ) whenever v E Q and v

u.

Hence all the t e r m s of the product corresponding t o values v f u are&g(u) and the product isgg(u)*[(-u(t)) Elementary subsets of exist ordinals r such that where W = V :

( -g(u))l = g(u)

vB. vF-(vB.

We shall now prove that there d W Let us put SB(F, a ) = SB(F, a )

. We

f i r s t prove the following

Theorem 18 (Principle of reflection). There is a function f : F r m X O n 4 O n such that for each F in F r m

(i) the function fF(r) = f(F, r) in an increasing and conti=

nuous mapping of O into On; n

(ii) if k = fF(k) and a E

(~2~"~). then SB(F,

k a ) = SB(F, a).

Proof. F o r atomic F we put f ( F , r) = r. If F is the f o r = m u l a ~ G r the formula (x )G with n b F r ( G ) , we put f(F, r ) = f(G,r). o n If F i s the formula G & H, then we put f(F, r ) = f(G, f(H, r)). Now let F be the formula (Ex )G and let n b F r ( G ) . n F o r each a r ( v ~ ) ~ ~ ( ~ by s(a) the least ordinal g we denote ) s such that V : contains an element x satisfying the equation SB((Exn)G, a ) = SB(G, $ i n , x

perty, then we put s ( a ) = 0. Now we define by induction a function g: g(0) =O. g(r + 1) = max(g(r). sup[s(a) : a e

3 y a ) ; if there i s no x with this pro=

g(t) = s u p i g ( r ) : r ( t

if t is a limit number..

Finally we put f(F, r) = g(f(G, r)). The proof that f satisfies the re.= quired conditions is similar to the proof of the Scott-Scarpellini theorem. F r o m the gr?ncipIe of reflection we obtain Theorem 19. There is, an increasing f : On-+On such that (f(k) = k ) g (v;-(vB) continuous mapping

Proof. The required function i s defined by induction:

A.

Mostowski

f(0) = iD, f(r) = sup

f(r

1) =

f f(t) : t < r ] if r is a sup { f(F, r) : F Frm}

limit number,

+I

It i s easy to show that f(k) = k implies f(F, - k) = k for each F 7Fr(F) and hence that SB(F, a ) = s:(F, a ) for every a in (Vk This proves the theorem. We shall now use the axiom of choice and obtain elementary subsets of VB with an arbitrary infinite power. To obtain this result we s t a r t with an ordinal k of power greater than a given power p and n Using the axiom of choice we correlate with consider the s e t V k' an arbitrary F in F r m such that O E F r ( F ) and an arbitrary a in an element x = H(F,a) of VB satisfyinq the con&= k k tions set forth in the maximum principle. We can call H the universal B Skolem f u n c t i o n , C l ~ ~ i nan arbitrarily given infinite set W &Vk g

(V7Fr(F)Io3

under the Skolem function H(F, a ) we obtain a s e t W' of the s a m e B B power a s W such that W q Vk and hence W ~ VThus we have pro=

ved Theorem 20 (The theorem of Skolem-Lowenheim),There a r e elementary submodels of

vB of

any infinite power.

Boolean models versus ordinary models. Let W be a subset of

vB.

A model M = < A , R) where A is a s e t and R i s a binary r e =

lation& AXA will be said t o be elementarily equivalent with W if for any sentence F (i. e. a formula without f r e e variables)

(sB(w=

I)E(M~F).
The existence of such a model for an arbitrary W is doubtful

but we shall show that the following condition secures its existence:
( A ) There is a maximal filter

all the sums

zx

of B which preserves

wSB(F, a v ( ( n ,

x>) ) where F E ~ r m ,n eFr(F)

A. Mostowski
and a t'W Fr(F) - I n 1

.
3
X

Remark. We say that a maximal filter sum b = z b i f

X

preserves a i s in

bE

implies that at least one b

5 .

lemma due to Rasiowa and Sikorski states that in. every algebra B there is a maximal filter which preserves a given denumerable num= ber of sums. F o r a set W S V ~ and a filter j b ~ W I(a, b ) e : )b 5 B we put which is

-= a

'5

for any

a in W.

Thus Z i s an equivalence class of the relation I(a, b)( easily

seen to be reflexive, symmetric and transitive (cf. lemmas

5,6,7). Let A = (?: a E W ~ and R =

The definition of R 4 E ( a t , b') and hence E(a, b a ' in H and b' in )

SL Z, - > b

E A XA : E(a, b ) E

1.

i s correct because I(a, a f ) * I ( b , b l ) * E ( a , b)

5 ~
).

implies E ( a l , b ' ) ~ 3 R> depends on

for any

i ;

The model<A,

W B and ,

3 and

can be denoted by M(W, B, parameters W, B,

A s long a s one o r more of the

3 is
If

fixed we shall simplify the notation by omit=

ting symbols whose values a r e fixed. Lemma 21. then

satisfies

(A), F E F r m and a C W F r ( F ),

(+I

s ~ ( F ,a )

M(W. B,

)I=F [z]

(in ( * )

the symbdll

means the sequence

i<i,ai>]

: i

Dom(a)

j.

Proof. If F is one of teh atomic formulae xi = xi o r xj c x j , then both sides of (+) 'have the same values. If F i s the for=

3 and the mula xi = x then the left-hand side of ( * ) is I(ai, aj) j' right-hand side is Zi =-aj. Thus (I) t r u e in view of the definition is
of g. If F i s the formula x i e x E(ai, a j ) then the left-hand side of (9&) s i j' and the right-hand side is (zi, sj) C R. Again both

sides a r e equivalent because of the definition of

R.

A.

Mostowski

We omit the trivial discussion of the cases where F i s one of the formulae lG,G & H and discuss only the case where F i s the formula (x )G and n e F r ( G ) . The left-hand side of ( h ) implies n in thin case W for each x in W. ( X + ) S B ( G a ~ 'n,[ x)! )E Using the inductive assumption we obtain immediately the right-hand side od (X ) .If the left-hand side of ( *) is false, then we use the maximality of

'3

and obtain

Ex,sE .

( l G , a"l<n, a>

J $

whence we infer by (A) that at least one t e r m of this sum

belongs to

Hence (tc*)

is false for at least one x in W and

using the inductive assumption we obtain the negation of the righthand side of (*). Taking in the lemma W = Vk where k is a critical number od the function f defined on p. with
147 we can prove the

Theorem 22. There a r e models elementarily equivalent

vB.
Proof. The required model i s M(V;, B,

% ) where

5 is

any maximal filter of B one of its terms.

The condition ( A ) is satisfied because in each sum mentioned in (A) is epual'to

view of the definition of f

Using the elementary submodel of

vB which

i s closed

with respect t o the Skolem functions H(F, a ) (see the proof of the Skolem Lowenheim theorem) we obtain in the same way the Theorem 23. F o r any infinite power there exist models of this power elementarily equivalent with V B , The well-founded cape. The models constructed in the abo= ve theorem need not be well-founded. We shall discuss the existence

of well-founded models elementarily equivalent t o

vB.

F i r s t we notice

A.

Mostowski

the following Lemma24. if ( A ,

R ; N is a model of Z F and the r e l a = =

tion R is well-founded in the set OnN

=]

A : N e Ord [a]{

, then

N is well-founded.
Proof. Formalizing the definition of s e t s Rr we obtain a formula such that F r ( F ) = 1 0 , 1 1 and the formulae (xo)(E!xlF,

F +Ord(xl),

F(xo, xl) & F ( x g , x3) & (xo c x X 2 ) 2 ( x 1 x3) a r e e sequence a n of elements of F which i an>& R for each n, there

provable in ZF. Hence if t h e r e were an infinite would be decreasing in the sense that ('an+l, Next we establish the important Theorem 2 5 (Behaviour of ordinals in there is an ordinal r such that SB(Ord, u) =
V

would a l s o exist a decreasing sequence of elements of OnN.

zsLf

vB).

If u a v B , then
b '

I h , s).
Y

Proof. If s Eon, then it is e a s y t o verify that SB(Ord, s) =1 and hence I(u, s ) 5 S B ( O r d , u) which proves the inclusion Ord(xo) & Ord(xi) -+ ( x o e xl v (xo = xl) and

.>.

In o r d e r t o prove the converse inclusion we notice that the formula

v (xltl xo)

is provaale in Z F and hence valid. It follows that for any u in VB

r in O n

SB(Ord, u) t E ( u , Since E ( u ,
Y

+ I , r) + E
XI.

u). E(X,

g)

C.rDom(r) F(U, *
v 6 Dom(u) [u(v)
+ ,

F)] = Lsc
1

~ ( us) .

'V

and E ( r , u) = "ord, B u)

<

zs

51

-5 I(u1 s)

I ( : ,

v)] we obtain

r C. Dom(u) I (4, v).

Now we notice that if r l f r 2 and r 1' r2EOn, then

A.

Mostowski

v Y I ( r l , v), I ( r 2 . v) = 0

for each v. Since B is a s e t t h e r e cannot

exist a r b i t r a r i l y long sequences of mutually disjoint elements of

B - 501.

Hence for each v there is an ordinal r

such that I ( r , v) = 0 for v : v~ ~ o m ( u ) )we every ordinal r>, r Choosing in ( ~) tr,> sup(r v v7 obtain SB(Ord, u) s t s LI(u,

3.

With the help of this theorem we can now establish

the

Theorem 26. there exist well-founded models elementarily B equivalent with V

Proof. Let W be a denumerable elementary subset of V F o r each u in W let r ( u ) be the l e a s t ordinal such that

(The elements has no

with s < r ( u ) do not, in general, belong t o W but this

bearing on the proof). According t o the Rasiowa-Sikorski theorem there is a

maximal filter

which p r e s e r v e s all the s u m s ( * )

We now

claim that the model M = M(W, B,

B theorems is elementarily equivalent with V , is well founded.

Let X be the s e t f u E W : SB(Ord. u)j]and notice that M that I(u, O n
=

) which according t o previous

1;

e] x. g) E 5
: u

F o r each u G X , there is an ordinal s < r ( u ) such because

p r e s e r v e s the s u m ( * )

Since

I(u, s ).I(u, s ) = 0 for s f s2 we infer that t h e r e is just one 1 2 1 such ordinal s = s(u). If u, v G.X, then E(u, v ) 3 implies ~ siu) E s(v) because E(u, v).I(u, syu))

-.I(v,

sYv))& E(SY~), s\lv))

and the right-hand side would be z e r o if syv) were s m a l l e r than o r equal to syu). Finally we notice that if v e i i , then s(v) = s(u) because I(u, v)*I(u, s ( u ) )& I(v,
V

SYU)).

The function h ( 3 = s ( u ) is therefore well defined f o r

A. Mostowski rin O n and has the properties: Rg(h)SOn, (u, v>(R +h(ii)<h(C). M This proves that the s e t OnM is. well ordered by R. Hence the model M is well founded.

A.

Mostowski

L e c t u r e VI In this l e c t ~ r e we shall prove the Theorem (a). A l l formulae provable in Z F a r e valid in an arbitrary Boolean model; (b) The axiom of choice i s valid in an a r = bitrary Boolean model. Since the rules of proof preserve validity (cf. theorems
1 - 3 of LectureV) it will be sufficient t o consider only the axioms

Now the axioms of (propositional and predicate) logic have been dealt with in theorem 4 of Lecture V and axiornsof identity in theorems
7 - 1 0 of that Lecture. It remains t o consider only the proper s e t theo=

retic axioms
(i). The case of the axiom Ext. Since the value of the

formula Cl(x.) is always 1 (see the definition of S

1

on

p!

132 )

it is sufficient t o show that the value of the formula

is 1 for an arbitrary sequence

value of the antecedent i s

on bounded quantifiers (theorem 1 2 of LectureV) we prove that the

1< 0 ,
- .

a,

, (1,

b>l.

Using the lemma

which proves the theorem. (ii) The case of the axiom Nopcl. We have to show that
. -

/ La

E(a, b) = 1. .Let a d vB and let b

be a function with do=

main {a) with the value 1. Obviously E(a, b) = 1 whence E(a, b) = 1 and, since a was arbitrary,

zb

A.

Mostowski

(iii) The case of the axiom C1 Since the antecedent of this 1' axiom has value 0 according to (ii), its value i s 1. (iv) The cases of the axiom C1 and Noat. In these axioms 2 the formula Cl(x) forms the postcedent and, since the value of the formula Cl(x) i s 1, we immediately obtain the result. (v) The case of the axiom Emp. Since E(a, 0) = 0 we obtain S B ( ( x l ) ~ ( x l ~ x O <,0 , 0 2 1 ) = 1 and hence S ((Ex )(xl)+x e x ),0)=1 1) B 0 1 0 This is the desired result because the axiom Nopcl has value 1 and hence the value of (Ex )(x G x ) i s 1 for any sequencerdo, a>] 1 0 1 *I (in the present case: for the sequence {LO, 0)) ). (vi) The case of the axiom Pair. Let a , b e ~ B and let c be a function with domain {a, b] identically equal 1. We easily verify that which proves the theorem in view of the result (ii) above. (vii) The case of the axiom Sum. Since we have verified the axiom Nopcl we can reformulate Sum a s follows: (~s)((x){(xc + - ( ~ y ) s) [(YE a) & (x eyj]] & (y){(y (a)
-(X)~XC~)-+(XES)]]
+

1.

In order to verify the validity of this formula we select an arbitrary

a in

vB and

seek an s in

vB such

that

We select s in such n way that Dom(s) = U ( ~ o m ( y ) : y e D o r n ( a )

A.

Mostowski

[ ~ ( x , y)-a(y)] f o r x in Domis). Dom(a) Equation ( I C ) i s then evident Since E(x. s) =

G

s x =

Cy

CtEDom(s)

I(x, t )

we f u r t h e r infer that for z in Dom(a) and x in Dom(z)

Since z ( x ) L E(x, z), the right-hand side is = 1 and equation

(*%)

is proved. (viii) The c a s e of the axiom Pot. This axiom can be taken

in the form (cf. (ii) above)

( *)

(Ex2)(xo) ( x 0 c x2) zz l

FJ

where F is the formula

(xZ)[(x26 x 0 ) 4 ( x 2 E xl)] B

.
0

of V

1' In o r d e r t o abbreviate our formulae we put

The maening of F i s , of course, x 5 x

Let a be an element

v(x) = SB(F.

{<o,
-

x> ,

< 1,

a>J),

thus v(x) is the truth-value of the

statement "x is a sub-set of a". If f t

~and~ f ( x ) c a ( x ) for) x in Dom(a), then eviden~ ( ~

tly v(f) = 1. Let P be the s e t of all functions with domain Dom(a) and values f(x)<a(x). We shall show that the function p defined by the equations Dom(p) = P, satisfies for each s in
( *Y )

p(f) = 1

for all f in P

vB the
f

equation

E ( s , p) = v(s).

We f i r s t prove the inclusion

OP

b ( s , f). p(f)J =

Cfg

5.

By definition E ( s , p) =

I(s, f) because p(f) = 1. But v(f) = 1

A.

Mostowski

for f in P and hence E ( s , p) = lemma on extensionality.

fcP

[I(s,

f).v(f&v(s)

in view of the

Now we prove the inclusion

a. F o r

an a r b i t r a r y s we define
= E(x, s)*a(x).

sX by m e a n s of the e q u a t i o n s ~ o m ( s s ) = Dom(a), s*(x)

Hence sSi4 P and two inclusions
v(s). s
Si-

* v(s) f 1= E ( s ,p).
(x) f E(x,
S)

Thus in o r d e r t o finish our

i. e. t o prove the

proof i t is sufficient t o show that v ( s ) f I(s, s')

for x & D O ~ ( S *) = Dom(a), f o r y E Dorn(s).

v(s)- s(y)f E(y. s* )

The f i r s t inclusion r e s u l t s immediately f r o m the definition of s" ; The second is established a s follows: since s ( y ) s E ( y , s) and V ( S ) * E ( ~s)fE(y, a ) we infer , v

s ) * ~ ( Y a) = z x q D o m ( a ) [ ~ ( y , s)-I(y. x)*a(x)] ,

<

Equation ( * W )

is thus proved.

It follows from t h i s equation for the argument 141, a

that the Boolean value of the formula ( *)

is 1.

>f

(ix) The case of the axiom Inf. Since the axiom Nopcl has been verified we can write this axiom in the form (Ex0 ) F where F is the conjunction of

A.

Mostowski

In o r d e r t o verify that the value of t h i s axiom is 1 it will be sufficient t o ahow that

S (G, L O ,~ 7 1 ) SB(H. ) ; B
-

The value of G is equal t o

v v This s u m is 1 since W(0) =

zxEDom(~) [&
1
4
(XI.?

v .

{~o,w>)) =
1.

v ,

-E(t,

xd

T( - E(t, 6 =

The value of H is (cf. the lemma on bounded auantifiers)

TTz [I(.,
, v "

XI

v Y Since Dom(&) consists of functions n where n

+ E(z, Y)]

i) .
+

( W .

and

nm,,zn ,,np,n@(g.
nZ[-1cz, we simplify this t o

= 1 we can simplify t h i s expression t o

I(&,

m) + ~ ( z .

i;go7$,, 31 .

E({,

$1

Using formulae (i)-(iv) established in Theorem 12 (Lecture V )

In

o r d e r to show

that this element is = 1 it will be sufficient t o

v
V

where m f = m v This results easily from the observation that E(z, m f ) =

show that for any m in Ld T I - 1 ( z , m ) + E(z. mt;]

1.

(x) The case of the axiom Fund.

Similary a s in the

p're-

vious c a s e s we can simplify this axiom by omitting Fund in the form

everywhere the

clauses that elements t o be considered a r e sets. Thus we can take

A.

Mostowski

or
( X0 I

equivalently ( x , ~ ( ( x , )(x,

e x0)

( ~ x ~ ) [ x(l )x & ( x 2 e XO)]] ~ ~

& (x3 E X
0

1).

We write t h i s formula briefly a s ( x o ) ( x 3 ) 1 F elements of

Let x, y
0

be a r b i t r a r y

vB and

a s s u m e that the element b

s B ( f , l < 0 , x>,<3, yo>3)

is f 0. We shall show that this assumption results in a contradiction.

Obviously and SB((xl) \(xl 6 xo) '(Ex2) Ex2' x l ) & (x2 E xo)]{
( 4

E(yo, X)

3 bo

{LO, x > i )

9 bo

Performing the calculation of S we obtain by the use of the lemma B on bounded auantifiers Using ( Y ) we obtain

Hence we infer that t h e r e i s a y bo. E ( y l , x) = bl> 0. Let us

($ Sc ) again we obtain

select a y

in Dom(y ) such that 1 0 of this kind. Applying

whence t h e r e exists a y infinite sequence y

in Dom(yl) such that b1*E(y2,

X)

b 2 7 0.

Continuing this process we construct (using the axiom of choice) an

E Dom(yn). This n+ 1 implies the existence of an infinite descending sequence of ordinals
0'

yl, y2,.

..

such that y

which is impossible. (xi) The c a s e of the axiom Subst axiom a s follows:

ZF'

formulate this

- 155

A.

Mostowski

(1)

~ x ~ ) i ~ x [F )g (xl ) x ~ ( x ~ =

ij --rixm)(~xn)(xl){(X1 x n ) i E
(Exo) l x o E xm) & F ! ] m' x . x do not occur in F n p 11 B , x, y E V , we

where F is a formula, 1 ( p < m <' n, x

B F r ( F ) -10, and 0, 1 E F r ( F ) . Whenever a E(V )

shall denote the element S ( F , {<o, x>, C l , y ' > j ~ a by fa(x, y). ) B Moreover we shall denote by a + b the element a. b + (-a)(-b) of B; thus if G, H a r e formulae and g~ (VB )F r ( G )ii F r ( H ) , then S B ( G z H, g) = SB(G, g Let a

( F r ( G ) ) * SB(H.

Fr(H)).

(V )Fr(F)- <o'

-h(a) + k(a) where h(a) = k(a) =flu&,nY@(y, that h(a)f--k(a). z).*

flXCyn z [ f a ( x ,
Cx [E(x,

The value of the formula (1) ii yl *I(y,

z)]

and

u)-fa(x, yfl)

We have t o prove

principle B (and the axiom of choice) we can correlate with e a c h x in V a y(x) in

F i r s t we notice that according to the maximum that

vB such

F r o m this we easily obtain the following two lemmas:

(3)

h(a)-fa(x, yl).fa(x, Y") C Uy', y"). Proof. According t o (2) h(a)afa(x,yl)d[fa(x, y')* I(y(x), y')]

f (x, yl).I(y(x), y,') and s i m i l a r y h(a)-fa(x, y")= I(y(x), yW)*fa(x, y")

whence h(a)*fa(x, y l ) - f (x, yl')=I(y(x), y')-I(y(x), y")LI(yl, y"). a (4) h(a) --Lfa(x, Y ( x ) ~ . Proof. F r o m (2) we s e e that h ( a ) r f (x, z ) Y I ( y ( x ) , z); now we put

y(x) and use the formula a'+ 1 = a. F r o m ( 3 ) and ( 4 ) we obtain

A.

Mostowski

(5)

h(a)-fa(x, y) & I(y, y(x)). Let now u be an arbitrary element of

vB and

l e t v be de=

termined by the
(6)

conditions:

Dom:v) =

{ y(x)

: x ~ ~ o m ( u ) ) v(y) =

C GDom(u) [u(x).fa(x. yg

We shall consider the value of E(y, v) for an arbitrary y (for y in Dom(v) it is given in (6)). F i r s t we notice that
(7)

-E(~a

V) +

Lx

Eom(u)

i"(x)-fa~x, y)] = 1,

Proof.' By definition E(y, v) whence by (6)

=L z

Dom(v)~ ( 2 ) - I ( z ,y)

The inclusion converse to that given in (7) cannot be pro= ved; but we shall show
(8)

h(a)

-zx

Dom(u) [u(x)-fa(x. Y

+ E(y, v)

Proof. Let x e Dom(u). By (51, h(a)-u(x).fa(x, y) L

[ f a Y(x))]= v(y(x)).I(y, y(x)) (here we use the fact t G Dom(u) that y(x)eDom(v)).. F r o m this inclusion we infer

h(a)*u(x)-fa(x, Y) f

[v(z) .Uy,

2))

= E(y, v)

Summing over x we obtain (8). (7) and (8) jointly give (9) h(a) CE(y, v) *

Cx[ ~ ( x . f

a yq

because (see the lemma on bounded quantifiers) T'

x; Dom(u)

&(x)*

A.

Mostowski

f a ( x Y)] duct

[ ~ ( x ,u)*fa(x,

yd .

Now we take the product

on the right-hand side of (9), then the s u m

'rrU .

Cv

Y and finally the pro=

In t h i s way we obtain the desired formula h(a)< k(a). Theorems which we have proved show that all the theorems

of Z F a r e valid in an a r b i t r a r y Boolean model. We shall now show that the axiom of choice is valid in these models. (xii) The c a s e of the axiom of choice. This axiom written in full takes the following shape: (xl = x 2 q + (Xo)[(xl)(x~(x3) [(x1c x~ & (x2 &x0) & (x3 E x l ) & ( x 3 c x2 jl+

~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ x ~ x 3 ~ ~& xI 4 G x ~ &~ ( x ~ E xx~o) X ~ X ~ { ~ ) ~ x 2 e & ( ~

( x = X4)) & ( x 2 ) ( X 3 ) ( ~ X 4 ) F ~ [

E X ~ ) (X~EX~U-+

~& (X3eX2i]+[(x4EX2) ~ ~ J

&

(x4exlqf)7 .
0

This formula can be written in the f o r m ( x o ) { ~ ( x o ) + ( ~ x ,[)K ( X ~ ,x l ) & L(xo, xiill where H "says" that x is a family of mutually disjoint s e t s , K(xo, L(xo, x l ) ''says" that x
1 one element in common with each s e t which belongs t o x and
X$

''says" that x

has a t most

1 each non void s e t which belongs t o x

has a t l e a s t one
0'

element in ccmmon with formula in 1 i n

In o r d e r t o prove that the value of this each Boolean model we select an a r b i t r a r y a in h(a) the element SB(H(x ),
0

{ 40,

a,)

denote by B ); we shall exhibit a b in V

vB and

such that

h ( a ) s k ( a , b) and h(a) & ] ( a , b) where k and 1 a r e values of

K(xo, x l ) and L(xd xl). It is D(a) =U intuitively obvious that the domain of b should be ~ o m ( a ) , } because each choice s e t for a s e t consists of D(a) in

Dom(y) : y

elements of the elements of this set. We shall define b(x) for x in such a way that for any u, x, y the Boolean product

A.

Mostowski

E(u, a ) * E ( x , b)*E(y, b)*E(x, u)-E(y, u) be 0 whenever I(x, y) = 0 This correspandsto the contain a t requirement that the choice set for a s e t should

most one element common with any element of this set.

Moreover we shall formulate the definition s o a s t o s e c u r e the inclusions b(x) fZJ[E(II, E(u. ~ ) . E ( z .

~ -) 6 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ~ )
a) .E(x, u)] and

[ ~ ( x ,u). b(xg which correspond t o the

requirements that the choice s e t for a s e t s c o n s i s t s of the elements of the e l e = ments of s and has a t l e a s t one element in common with each non-void element of s Let us arrange the elements of ~.,Dom(a)in a transfinite .se= quence d with r < s , s e On. The following definition m e e t s all the

requirements: Dom(b) = where E

Si

{ dr
=

: r

c s 1,

b(dr) =

[E(u, a). E

(dr. u o

(d,,

U)

E(dr, u).

Ti t < r

-E(d,, u)

Before calculating k(a, b) we notice that from the definition

of h it directly follows that

(1)

h(a). E(u, a). E(v, .a). E(dr, u). ~ ( d , , Next we prove for a r b i t r a r y r , r '

V)

< I(U,

V)

c s

(2)

h(a). E(u, a). E(dr, u). E(dp, u). b(dr). b ( d r l ) 5 I(dr, d,,). In o r d e r to prove this we merely replace b(d ), b(d,,) by

their values and represent the left-hand side a s the union of t e r m s h ( a ) . [ ~ ( u , a). E(dr, u). E(v, a). E

*d

, v)]

. ~ E ( U a). ,

E ( d r , , ul.

E ~ V ' , a). E * (dr,, vl)]

A.

Mostowski

extended over a r b i t r a r y v, v'.

According t o (1) the expression i n c h =

ded in the f i r s t square bracket is s I ( u , v) and the expression i n c h = ded in the second square brackets is & I(u, v'). Hence according t o the lemma on extensionality the left-hand side of (2) i s
E
ic

(dr, u)*E

(dr,,

This product is 0 if r f r l ; thus (2) i s evident in this case. If r f r1 then (2) is a l s o t r u e because i t s right-hand side is then 1. We shall now prove (3) h(a). E(u, a). E(x, u). E(X, b). E(Y, u). E(Y, b) f I ( ~ y) , Notice that this inclusion is very s i m i l a r to ( 2 ) ; the only difference in that d dr, a r e replaced by x, y and that instead of r' b(dr), b(dr,) we now have E(x, b), E(y, b). In o r d e r to prove (3) we denote i t s left-hand side by obtain
L

and expand E(x, b), E(y, b) according to the definition of E. 11 e then

which by extensionality i s

The expression in the square brackets is S I ( d r , d ,)(cf(2)), whence

If now we represent ( 3 ) a s h(a). P

< I(x,

y) and transform ( 3 ) t o

we obtain h(a)$k(a,

b)

We now pass t o the proof of the inclusion h(a) S ] ( a , b) and

A. Mostowski first (4) This establish the inclusion E(u. a). E ( d t U)

?r

6Zr<

[&dr.

u). b(drg
U)

Zr<,E
4(dr,

7is shown a s follows: it is obvious that E(dt, u ) < o r K s E(dr,

d , u . The l a s t step is based on

lawC r<s x r =
E

Cre [xr.

a well known Boolean

u).

nt,,(-xt4whieh

allows us t o represent each

Boolean sum a s sum of mutually disjoint elements. Since

U)

<E(dp. u) we can also write E(d

t'

U I C ~ [E(dr, rcs

~ * ( d ~ d . Now we multiply both s i d e s by E(u, a ) and notice that u , E(u, a). E obtain (4).
We
k

idr, U)'Zv[~(v,

a). E (dr, v g = b(dr). In this way we *

t r a r y z. To

want now t o replace in (4) the element d by an a r b i = t achieve this we use the definition of E and the lemma on

extensionality obtaining

Applying again the definition of E we

obtain

Now we notice that if v E Dom(a), then Dom(v) g and hence the sum

D(a) =

Dom(b)

r Dom(v)

is

sq

s. Thus we obtain

since I(u, v). v(dt)< I(u, v). E(d , v ) S E ( d , u) we further obtain t t t4s [ ~ ( ~ t ' u)'

z ~ Dom(a)(I(., c

v). a(V)d =

2,,,b(u.

a).

E(dt, u> which according t o (4) is the l a s t s u m is obviously

5x
X

iE(dr, u). b(dr)] Since r< s b ( x , u). E ( a , b a we finally infer that

LL

A. Mostowski

E~U,

a). ~ ( z u ) c C [ ~ ( x . u). .
X

E(X.

biJ

Performing obvious Boolean transformationswe obtain from this inclusion the identity

which is the same a s I (a, b) = 1. Thus h ( a ) s l ( a , b) and the theorem is proved.

A. Mostowski L e c t u r e VII In this lecture we shall construct (after Scott) a model in which the axiom of constructibility is not valid. In connection with this result we shall construct two transitive families of s e t s which a r e models of Z F and have equal heights but a r e not elementarily equivalent. We consider the Cantor s e t 2
0

, i. e. the s e t of functions

with domain W and with values in the s e t $0, the usual product regular closed domains, i. e. of s e t s which

11 .

We introduce in 2

topology and denote by B the Boolean algebra of can be represented a s

closures of open sets. The Boolean operations in B have the follo= wing meaning: the sum is the closure of the s e t theoretical union the product i s the closure of the interior of the intersection

x b x = v xbx,

71, bx = Int n
The s e t s C :
=

and -b is the closure of the complement of b. form a sub-base of the space a n d belong

{f : f(n) = i

Another property of B which we shall need is concerned with i t s automorphisms. L e t p be a permutation o f d a n d let F be a function deffned on 2
6)

by the equation F ( f ) = f o p. It can be

shown

that F is a n autohomeomorphism of P a n d hence the function H : b-+Im(F, b) is an automorphism of B. Lemmal. If 0 B such that H(b) f b. Proof. Since b and -b contain non-void open s e t s , t h e r e a r e two neighbourhoods U, V the f i r s t of which i s contained in b .and the other in -b. We cen a s s u m e that U

f b f 1, then t h e r e is an automorphism of

=lc1';).
C k m

We now determine k

~ ( j ) integers m ( j ) , j f k , such that the intersection V = Vn . 1 J fkCm(J)

A. Mostowski
be non-void. Such integers exist because the requirement f G V imposes of initial coot-= and

only finitely many conditions on a fixed number, s a y 1, dinates of f. Thus we can select k coordinates m ( l ) , impose on them the condition bitrary initial 1 coordinates. Let p be a If f

. . . ,m(k)> 1

f(m(j)) = &'(j), The resulting neighbourood

W has points i n common with V because W contains points with a r =

permutation ofdwhich maps n(j) onto m(j).

(-b)rr W n V then F(f) 6 U because the value of F(f) = f o p

for the argument n(j) is equal t o ~ ( j ) . This proves that H(-b)r\ b f 0 and hence - b n ~ - ' ( b ) f 0 whence ~ - ' ( b ) f b. Definition. d(n) = Cg
V

Let d be a function with domain W such that

.
Remark. We can look upon elements of

vB a s

a kind of 'k is in the

"multivalued s e t s " such that logical value of a formula

set" is an element of B not necessarily 0 o r 1. Thus we can visua= l i z e d a s a "multivalued set1' such that the truth value of a sentence "n is an element of d" is a union of n

1 intervals of the

Cantor s e t C

consisting of those r e a l s in C which in the t e r n a r y scale have the n-th digit 0. It is obvious from t h i s picture and it will be proved formally in lemma 3 below that d is different from all o r d i n a r y two-valued sets. Lemma 2. If F is the formula (x2)L ( x 2 x ) -+ ( x 2 e x1 ~ ( i . e . ) x g x ), then s ~ ( F , { < o , d \ , , l , k y t ) 0 1 Proof. The value in question is Since
V

.-

"

" Dom(d) = i3 =)X : n E & ( and Q(n) = 1 for

f

nx

= 1.

-Dom(d) cd(x) + &(xq

element -d(x)

+ LV(X)

<

~ E L we s e e that the J

is 1 for each x in Dom(d).

Lemma 3 . If a &a, then I(d, a) = 0. Proof. F r o m the definition of I we obtain

b '

A.

Mostowski

In both factors "x" can be replaced by

11

11

by I'm

Vl 1

-d(n) = C1 n' n = m , we cati simplify the above

with m ranging over a. Since d ( l ) = C 0 n ' .'v / , \*' a m = 1 and I(n, m) is 0 o r 1 according a s n f m o r expression and obtain

where i ( n , a ) = 1 if n r a and 0 otherwise. Thus I(d,

where g ( p ) is 0 for p E a and 1 otherwise. In view of .the definition of B we further obtain ~(a,

a) =

.----

Int

and the lemma i s proved. We shall now discuss the problem of an effective choice for the s e t P(P(&)). Thus we shall investigate the question whether t h e r e exists ?n effectively defined function which c o r r e l a t e s with each non-void subset of P(&) an element of this set. In o r d e r t o make precise the notion of an effectively defined function we reformulate the praoblem a s follows: does there exist a formula F with F r ( F ) =
1

10,

1 such that the sentence : ,

( : ( ~ x , ) ( x ~ i x & )(x1)(x2) [ ( x l ~ x o )& ~ J
-4( E !

(*)

be true. In this sentence the antecedent means that x element of x

set of subset of 9 and the conclusion s a y s that there is just one

0

which stands t o x

fly6 .Dam($

'

-7'
-X

E Dom(d). &I(x). I(X, Y)J

"XI1

1.

with n ranging over& and

9)

PGb

iT c

(P' - Tnt ~ C = Io

( X Z ~ X 1 ) ] ~ ( Xe 2

3)))

x I ) [(x1c x0) & F]

0

is a

non-void

in the relation defined by F.

A.

Mostowski

If we wish t o have the sentence written out exclusively by means of the primitive notions of set theory, we can eliminate the constant W by replacing the expression lVxg W" by E
(

( + x ) Ord(x2) & l L i m ( x2)

1

& (x3)[(x3~x2)+~~im) x 3(

where Ord(x.1 is the conjunction of the formulae [xiis transitiverl

[the and Lim(x.) is the formula Ord(xi) & [(Eu)(u E x.)] 1

& (v)

E-relation is connected in x.]

i (v e x i ) +(Fw)[(w 6 xi) p.is limit ordinal

1
J.

&

(V E W $ ~

> 01.

The formulation of the problem is s t i l l imperfect because the word "true" is unclear. We therefore replace the problem by a relative one. Let M be a (Boolean o r ordinary) model for ZF. We s a y that F determjnes a choice function for P ( P ( W ) ) in M if (Sr- ) is va= lid in M. F r o m Remarks contained in Lecture 111 it follows: Theorem 1. If M is a transitive family of s e t s which is a model for Z F and if the axiom of constructibility is valid in M, then t h e r e is a formula which determines a choice function f o r P(P(u)) in M. We shal s e t s in now prove sets Theorem 2. If B is the Boolean algebra of regular closed

10, 1

, then there is no formula which determines a choice

function for P(P(C3)) in

vB.

Proof. Let us assume thet (t) valid in is

s&) = 0 for each a S Cc).

vB.

The main

idea i s t o consider the "multivalued set" s such that s ( d ) = 1 but Formula F c o r r e l a t e s with s one of i t s

A.

Mostowski

elements. The contradiction a r i s e s by showing that t h i s s e t is inva= riant with respect t o all automorphisms of B and thus is a two-valued set. We define s by equation Dom(s) =

( x e vBL)+~
f

a S W -1 (x, x)J In view of the Lemma 3 s ( d ) = 1. Consider now the formu=

=

: Dom(x) =

d f s(x)

b '

la

(x4)(x5)

/bx4

E xo) P1 ( x 5 c x 4 1 ] (x5 E ~
r

W)

whose exact meaning is

explained in (it-*!

We claim that the value of this formula for the

element s is 1 , This can be verified a s follows lemma bn bounded quantifiers this value is
=

In view of the

x ~Dom(s)

fly 6 Dom(x) - x . x ( ~ ) ] + A ( ~ ) ] where A ( y ) i s the v value of formula (k*)f o r the argument y. Since y e ld it can be r e p r e = L. tented a s a with ag.5) and we verify immediately that ( Y * ) has the value 1 for the argument v n

.
< 3 , d>

Thus both the formulae in the antecedent of ( * ) have the value 1 for the argument { d o , s > . ,
(i)

sB ((E!

x 1 ) [ ( x 1 ~x0) & F]

t. I .and it follows that . s) =

0

We define a function a the element selected f r o m s: Dom(ao) =

which-intuitively speaking-describes

6 , ao(n) = C

Dom(s)

f(x) = SB(F, ~ C O , s,> ,

<.I, x

>I

) and want to prove that E ( a

0'

s) = 1

The following implication is of course provable in ZF:

This formula results f r o m an obvious theorem of Z F which says that if there is just one x 1 satisfying a condition and x c o n s i s t s of exactly
3

A.

Mostowski

those elements which belong to a set satisfying this condition, then x3 too satisfies the condition in question. The first t e r m of the antecedent of (ii) has the value 1 for the argument $40, s>] , see (i). We shall show that the value of the second t e r m in the antecedent of (ii) has also the value 1 for the argument

~ C O , Z , C ,ao> f s

. This term is logically equivalent to

the conjunction of

(iv)

(x2)(xl) { F 1 ~ x o )& ( x 2 ~ x l ) F ] - + ( ~ ~ E x ~ ) $ . k The value of (iii) can be calculated using the lemma on

bounded. quantifiers. The result is

and this product i s 1 according to the definition of a (iv) i s

0'

The value of

e Dom(s) ZIy

G Dom(x)

fi-s(x)) + (-x(Y)) + ( - f ( ~ ) )+ ~ ( y a ,

We can replace y by

since Dom!x) =

&. After
'b

obvious Boolean

calculations we s e e that the value of (iv) is r(ns

( - L x c0
0'

Domes) [s(x).

because E: (, we obtain E(a

a ) = a (n).
0

f(x). x ( ~ ) j+ ao(X)) '

0

Thus in view of the definition of a

this

product is 1. Thus the whole antecedent of (ii) has the value 1 and

s) = 1, i. e.

We shall deduce a cpntradiction from this formula. A s r e = marked above we shall obtain it by showing that a two-valued set. F i r s t we show that s is symmetric in the following sense:
0

an ordinary

A.

Mostowski

the mapping of vB onto h V determined by h (see p. 1 3 8 ), then f ( s ) = s. To see this we no= v tice that i f x E Dom(s), then Dom(x) = W and hence Dom(f(x)) = If h i s an automorphism of B and f = f

[f(u) : u ~ o m ( x ) ] =

because elements of W a r e invariant under f.

Further we calculate the value of f(s) for the argument s = f(x) where x E Dom(s):

f(x) = g).

(In the last but one equation we used the obvious equation The symmetry of s i s thus established. Using the symmetry of s we obtain by theorem on p. 140

hence a (n) is invariant with respect t o all automorphisms and hence

0

(X)

is either 0 o r 1 (see lemma 1). Thus I(a

= 11)

a 1 = i n : a,("

Thus

a ) = 1 where 1 intuitively speaking - the element s e =

0'

lected from s is a two-valued set. Using (v), the definition of s(x) and the equation I(a
0'

) = 1 we derive

and the right-hand s i d e ' i s obviously 0. Thus we obtained the desired contradiction and theorem 2 is proved. Form theorems 1 and 2 we infer Theorem 3. No transitive model for ZF in which the axiom B of constructibility is valid can be elementarily equivalent with V

A.

Mostowski

In particular we s e e that the axiom of constructibility is not prova= ble in ZF even if we adjoin t o it the axiom of choice. We shall now prove Theorem 4. T h e r e a r e two (two-valued) transitive models f o r Z F whose heights a r e equal but which a r e not elementarily equivalent. Proof. Let M be a transitive model elementarily equivalent with

vB

and M t the family of constructible elements of M. Then M'

elements=

has the s a m e height a s M and is transitive but M' is not

r i l y equivalent with M because t h e r e is a formula which determines a choice function f o r P(P(i*))) in M' whereas no such formula e s i s t s for M. It would be interesting t o know whether t h e r e existsa f o r = mula which determines the choice functions f o r P ( P ( ~ ) ) a natural in model. The answer t o this question cannot be given, however, because i t e s = sentially depends on the axioms f o r set theory accepted in metamathe= matics.

A. Mostowski
L e c t u r e VIII

In this lecture we shall construct a model in which the continuum hypothesis is false. Our f i r s t task will be to express a sentence of our formalised language this hypothesis as

. In

o r d e r t o achieve some economy

in o u r notation we shall introduce some abbreviations We shall write other small occurs. mulae E x, y, z for

.
x

xo, xl, x2; furthermore we shall use

and shall a s s u m e i that t h e i r choice has been made in such a way that no collision of variables We shall a l s o make extensive (EY)~[

Roman l e t t e r s instead of the variables

-].

u s e of limited

quantifiers:

the for-

(EY); [- (EY)? [-] will mean : (EY)j(y 3,

e XI&

t-~].

x ( E )

-1,

(Es) x(Ey)i

-1 where
F

z, s

a r e now variables not bebelongs to Frm

fore present in the formulae. The quantifiers ( Y ) ~ ( Y ) ~ ( Y ) ~ r e defined , , a in a dual way. Prefixing a formula mited quantifier of whatever s o r t by a liPr we obtain again a formula which belongs which

to F r m As a final abbreviation we shall use the symbol (Eu, v, .) pr' instead of (Eu) (Ev). and similarly f o r the general quantifiers and limited

..

..

existential and general quantifiers. We now shall list s e v e r a l auxiliary formulae; we add (in square brackets) the intuitive meaning of each formula.

[ x

is a n unordered p a i r whose elements a r e y and z]

[x

is a n unordered p a i r with the f i r s t member y and the second member z J ;

- 171 -

A. Mostowski
(x, y, Z ) : ( E U ) ~ P(u, x , z) b h e ordered p a i r with members belongs to y] Re1 (x) : ( s ) (Eu, v), P ( s , u, v)
X

x, z

[x is a relation] ;

iy
Rg (x, y) : similarly a s above but (v, x, u) with

is the domain of x

(u, x , v)

replaced by x]
;

I is the y

range of

Fn(x): Re1 (x)& (u, v, w, t ) x {ku, x, v) &(w, x, t i +ku=wr(v=t,!) [x is a one-one function] [ x

;

, Y,

21:

~ n ( y ) & D o m(y. x

)& Rg(y,

z )

maps x onto z in a one-one way]

;

Ord (x) : s e e Lim(x): s e e

p, 1 6 5

fi is a n ordinal]

p. 16.5 [ x

is a l i m i t ordinal

> 0; 1
is the ordinal w ]

omo(x) : Ord (x)

& Lim(x)

&(y)x T L i m ( y )

Lemma 1. The following formulae a r e provable in Z F :

This l e m m a is evident and needs no proof. Since the formulas listed above a r e all predicative, we can apply t o them theorem 1 3 from l e c t u r e V. In this way we can immediately obtain the value of each of the above formulae f o r the argument of the form v {<o,:>, <I, (2, c > ) . F o r instance SB (x C y. 4 (0. ,<I,%>)) is 1 if a ~ b

*b>,

0 otherwise, s i m i l a r y S (om (x), 0, a,) ) is 1 if a B O 1 We notice the result explicitly f o r the formula [x, y, zJ : and

<

x>

w and

0 otherwise.

- 112

A. Mostowski

Lemma f

2.

sB( x

0
a onto

, , 1
b;

, , <2, b>

"

) is

if

is

one-one

mapping of

otherwise this value is, 0.

In o r d e r to e x p r e s s the continuum hypothesis we need still one formula which , however, is not an element of Frm Pr
:

(Et) iy, t,

g}/jis

the f i r s t

uncountable The continuum hypothesis abbreviated a s follows : CH can

ordinal]

now be expressed

Before exhibiting a model

vB

in

which

CH

has the value will contain

0 3

we want to explain the underlying idea. The model elements be 1 a, b, c for which

vB

the value of the antecedent in

V

CH will

and the value of the consequent will be a: the only natural choice validity of the function
b

0. There is little doubt

a = w

how t o choose for c

is

is

. The
CH.

natural choice
v

the 1 c

element which we constructed in l e c t u r e axiom Pot: with the

VI when we
w

verified the value take as tically 1 course

w
v

the

this element together with BDom(')

gives

for the l a s t formula in the antecedent of domain element

Hence we

whose value is iden-

.
v w ? The a n s w e r depends of 1 the value of the formula oml(xl) f o r the argument

Can we take for on whether

is 1 . Looking a t the formula om we can easily convince ourselves 1 1 that this is the case provided that the value of the formula z, x] for

rY,
1

the arguments $(f) : f < l , > :. <2, f>, <0, B V If this c o n d i t i p is satisfied, then we

is

for

each is B

f a

in such

shall s a y that t h e r e a r e algebras

cardinal that

in is

vD.
not

It

can

be shown of

that

ul

a cardinal

vB

- 173

A. Mostowski

It is instructive del for V each the ordinals

to

discuss and

this phenomenon. a r e of different of the

=

In the ordinary mopowers and thus

g
2

in

the truth value SB( [Y,

formula q(g)

Cy,

z, x]

for

the argument f r o m lemma contains l u e s a r e not many

<1, w> , that

<2, g> , < 0,wl>)

z, XJ

is

0. It

follows

4(8)= 0 .
g,
g
d

However the model

vB

elements not of the form

e.g. all functions whose va-

only 1. Hence i t f not of

may very well happen that t h e r e will be in for which SB(ry, Z , X ~ , x($=l. B with this prov

vB

an In

element

the form

next theorem we shall

formulate a sufficient condition for f b = w

which ensures that perty. Hence if B

vB

does

not contain elements

satisfies t h i s condition we can take

'

The problem whether the continuum hypothesis is not valid dependes consequent now in on the values of SB( [x2, xo, x1] , f 0 such and that so has v(f)
<2, c>)-) = v(f)

in

vB
>,

(0, f > , <I, $ v(f)

. If
CH

there

is

no

1 0 , then the be answ

1

has the value what

the whole formula cannot V the s e t s

CH.
and of B

Again

the problem

is the value of

wered in

a straightforward is sufficiently an f in

way. In the ordinary model

BDom(G)

have different powers provide* that the cardinal number big. However this by itself does not preclude the

existence of

vB

f o r which

v(f)

would be B

1 B

.
which suffices we

In next theorem we shall f o r the equation shall satisfied v(f) = 0 construct a n algebra B

formulate a condition on for which t h i s sufficient

to be t r u e throughout

. Afterwards

condition is

In t h i s

way the independence of 1.

CH will be proved.

In o r d e r t o have s h o r t e r formulae we introduce the following definitions: Definition f, b ]

I '

= SB( [xj, x i xJ ,[<i, f>, <j,a>, <k, b>])

= SB((xj, xi, xk), ( < i s f>,

( . f. X

Y)

( , x>, <k. y > ) ) 1

We shall usually omit the index B

- 174

A. Mostowski Definition 2. We s a y that a Boolean algebra satisfies the countable chain condition (abbreviated ccc) if every s e t disjoint elements is a t Remark: Theorem 3. Let most countable. B are c c let ~ disjoint if b'. bI1 = 0 elements bl, b u of B satisfy
X E B consisting of mutually

.
and

b, c be elements of

vB

a subset

of

Dom(c) and let the following assumptions hold :

PI
(3)

c(y) = 1

for each

in

Dom (c) ; elements of B in V

I(y, y') = 0 for any two (different) Under these assumptions Proof. We put f o r z in [b, f, c ] Dom(b) (z, f, y =0 f o r each
f

Z(z) = f y E A : [b, f, c]. If y, y' belong Ib, and hence, if to

f.

))> 0

'

Z(z) , c3

then
f,

by l e m m a 1 (ii)
f.

. (z.

Y). ( z ,

Y') C_ I(y, y l )

y { yt, the product Ib, f, c] . ( z , f, y)

.-

. Lb,

f, k ]

.
elements be-

(z, f, y l ) = 0 according to (3) cause otherwise has power A B

. Thus

would not satisfy

a t most max ( K O , Dom(b) ) whence, by ( I ) , t h e r e is a Z(z). Since

= 1

Z(z) has a t most

Ccc.

The

union

uzGDom(b) z(z) y in

which does not belong to any

y E D o m (c) we obtain,

by (2) , c ( y ) = E(y, c ) [b, f, c]

E(y, c )

. Now we use l e m m a l ( i ) and infer that 6 z v [ ~ ( v .b) . (v, f, y a . The left-hand side of this for:

mula is simply

[b, f, c ]

the right -hand side can be transformed accor-

ding to the lemma on bounded quantifiers. Thus we obtain

- 175 -

A. Mostowski
in Dom(b). Hence we obtain above :

because [b,

is

not in

Z(z) f o r any

f. c j = 0

.
B satisfies ccc and

We note two corollaries f r o m the theorem proved Corollary 4. If B f o r each f in V Proof. Put Corollary 5. If
v

re w l

then

[ :

f, u J = 0

v b = r , A = Dom
B satisfies we

v ( z ) ,c = w 1 1
ccc, then

in the previous theorem.

Remark. Strictly speaking

w

S (om (x), w ) = 1 B 1 1 should have taken 1<'0, and not

zl>]

a s the argument in SB ; we shall however use the s i m p l e r 1 l e s s accurate notation in o r d e r t o abbreviate o u r formulae. Proof. We can write

though

is the conjunction of

om (x) in the f o r m 1 4 formulae

0 r d ( x ) & ( ~ yK )

where

We shall now calculate the values of t h e s e formulae for the argument

f<0,g1>, <l,

k>j

(notice that

is the s a m e a s x

as

according t o our convention)

. Obviously
5

0'

and y

the s a m e

the values of formula mentioned to establish this an arbi-

0 r d ( x )& omo(y) &(yx) in (+) trary f onto in

is

1,

the value of the third Corollary

( )

is

according to last formula such that

. In
and Now

order show
w

r e s u l t f o r the ordinal

it is sufficient t o consider
w

that
1 =

< r < wl

IJB such

s a m e power

No and
2

[w",

f,

u.
a

that t h e r e is an

and

have both the

g

thus t h e r e is we obtain

one-on6 mapping

r. By

lemma

[$ g,

g= 1

of

which

proves o u r CH to Let

cprollary. Our next theorem reduces the a construction Theorem of a 6:Let B be a problem of independence of suitable algebra: complete algebra satisfying ccc.

A. Moatowski there be a s e t that f o r any two of power

>

X1 and a function
B

a ] : V

u -+ B

such

i, j 6 J

Then element

CH has the value

at, a n

0 in

.
B, then
c be at* a n is the a function such that

Remark. If

a r e elements of

a t . a " +(-at). ( - a n ) Dom(w) Proof Put P = B and

let

Dom(c) = P and c(x) = 1 for a l l pp. 172 <2, c > ) the formulae of (remember that
0

in

. As

we have explained on which appear v the argument {<O, w>, and "xn the is om (y); 1 for the argument 1

omo(x) and (t) [(t E z)? (t 2 x)

in the antecedent same a s "x ") {<I, is Thus

CH have the value

"zV

1 for

is the s a m e

. The l a s t factor
5

2 in the antecedent of 1 of f ~ hi, all

1

a s "x

CH

according t o Corollary theorem will be proved

this formula has value

the whole antecedent if

CH
in .

has the value

. The

we show that each nG w

the value of the consequent

0 i.e. that v h.(n) = a(i, n) f o r

1

[u;, f,
and

4 = 0 for
with (2) b =

i E J,

. Thus
61

vB v
B

. Let
of

us

put

B = Dom (c)~ ~ ~

by with
3

the family of a l l

the functions

iEJ

. We

. ~Denote ) ~
and c. Dom(b)

shall show that

this notation

the assumptions

a r e satisfied let

has power Finally

XI. Assumption
y = hi { h
j

. Assumption
= yt

(1) is t r u e because

X =f

theorem

holds i n view of the definition of I(y, y1) is the product of

. Then

the element

and a

s i m i l a r element obtained by interchanging

element is

=n

and

j.

The f i r s t thus

nw Fhi($

+ hj(Xg

=n

Ww

1-a(i. n)

+ a(j, n g

and

*a(j, nfl = 0 Theorem In

. Thus
7.

assumption

(3)

is satisfied and

[gl,

f, c ]

= 0

6 is thus proved.

o r d e r to settle

the independence of

CH we prove finally

Theorem theorem
6

There exists a n a l g e b r a satisfying all assumptions of

.
J

Proof. Let

be a

set

of power

>
that

and

the with the

Boolean algebra of regular closed domains in the s p a c e usual A product topology. It

P(J)

is well known
in

this algebra is complete. X and

basis

of neighbourhoods

P ( J ) is furnished by the family of s e t s where

U(X, Y) =

{Z

_C J : (X _C z)&(z

n Y = 0 )]

a r e disjoint P(2) and

finite subsets of hence belong t o r e d in theorem a one-one

J. These neighbourhoods a r e open

and closed 10

B; a : Jx w +J
J

F i r s t we construct the mapping

6. Since

with properties requithere is a(i, n) = u ( j g ( i , n)) ,0).

i

Jxw
JXw

and onto

have equal powers J.

We

mapping a(j, n)

g of

put Let

={zc J

: g(i. n ) E Z

) ; obviously

a(i, n ) e B . with

and b(i, j, n ) =.

= a(i, n)*

. Since
a(i, n)

a(i, n) is open and closed, B coincides

i t s complement in and

the s e n s e of the algebra Thus we obtain -a(i, n)

the set-theoretical complement. n)EX)

. - a(j,

. a (j, n) = { X E J : (g(i, n ) E X)&(&j,

n) = { x ~ J : (g(i, n)

X S J : (g(i, n ) ~ ~ ) & ( n), L x)] j the closure of the ihterior of the that the product is 0

n it will be sufficient to prove that the interior of Z

# X) & (g(j, n) # x)) and hence b(i, j, n) = . It follows now that n n b ( i , j, n) is s e t Z = n b( i, j, n) . In o r d e r to show
Z

is void. Let us a s s u m e that

contains a non-void open set. Hence

contains a neighbourhood and g(j, n)# X

U(X, Y) g(i, n)

. Take
g(j, n)

so

that

g(i, n ) + ~ Y U a(i, n) n-a(j, n)n

uY

. Since

the intersection

U(X, Y) is non void. This is impossible because this intersection is

A. Mostowski

disjoint f r o m

and

U(X, Y)

Z.

In o r d e r t o s h o w t h a t
U(X, Y)

B satisfies

ccc

it

is sufficient
t h e o r e m of

t o show

t h a t t h e r e is no uncountable f a m i l y of m u t u a l l y d i s j o i n t s e t s of t h e f o r m

. This

r e s u l t s i m m e d i a t e l y f r o m a well-known
34 )

Marczewski give rem.

(Fundamenta Mathematicae

: for completeness1

s a k e we

h e r e a proof

(due t o Cohen) of t h e s p e c i a l c a s e of M a r c z e w s k i t s theo-

We notice containing (X U X t )

f i r s t t h a t (U(X, Y) disjoint

U(Xt, Y1) = 0)Z

r ( I~Y I ) U ( X ~ ~ Y )01. #
contained i n in J and particular side because e . g.
i E X nY1 ,

F o r if t h e left-hand s i d e is t r u e , t h e n a n y s e t X U X1 cannot b e from

Y U Yt and

(YUYt) , 0 which is equivalent t o t h e righ-hand f

X fI Y = X t fI Y1 = 0
then e a c h s e t where ber, n in Now l e t u s we can at say the

. Conversely,
assume

if

i E ( X fI Y1) U(Xtn Y)
i

U(X, Y)

contains that t h e r e all

but

none s e t

i n U(X1, Yl) d o e s s o . f a m i l y U(X ,Y ) r r U Y is finite,

is a n uncountable

r c R of m u t u a l l y d i s j o i n t neighbourhoods. S i n c e X once a s s u m e that n, these sets

Xr U Yr

have the s a m e num-

of e l e m e n t s . T h i s f o l l o w s b y t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t f o r at l e a s t R1
=

set

i r R:~Xr
R

U Y
by

and hence we can replace

h a s n elements r the set Rt

1 must

b e uncountable

We s h a l l obtain a c o n t r a d i c t i o n
is a n uncountable s e t

b y showing t h a t f o r e a c h

k there k
ele-ments that

R CR k-

and

set

with

exactly

such

that

= 0

, R

sets

Po

P C X U Y for each r in F o r k = 0 w e set kr Rk* r = R R e a s o n i n g b y induction w e a s s u m e t h a t k 3 0 and

. . . E Pk,
k

0-

way t h a t

Pk h a s

elements,

. . .3 Rk -

h a v e a l r e a d y b e e n defined i n s u c h a

is uncountable

and

for arbitrary

r, s i n

Rk

'

- 179 -

A. Mostowski

Y > # < X , Y > whenever r # s and since t h e r e r s s a r e only finitely many p a i r s of s u b s e t s of P k , it is c l e a r that t h e r e
Since

< X,,

e x i s t s an

in R

k
0

such

that
) and

(Xr U Yr )
0 0

- Pk #

0. For

ro the each

neighbourhoods

U(Xr , Y,

U(Xs, Y ) a r e disjoint; hence for

S

s in

Rk

f r o t h e r e is an element

i = i(s)

such that

Each such
i

belongs to to

to

Xr U Yr
0
0

but to to

none to PknXsn~, Pk

Pk. Otherwise

would either

belong

P nX nYs k r
0

or or

according to

(n)

either

PknXs

"
r

and

hence which

0 0

fl Y

is impossible because Now is an Let

i
0

these intersections

a r e void.

notice that in this

(X U Y ) P is a finite s e t and hence t h e r e r r k 0 s e t such that O i(s) = i f o r uncountably many s.

0

Pk+l=Pk U i

!I

01 and
we

let

Rk+l

) seRk
s

: i(s) = i

t.

We have to satisfied t o verify arbi-

verify because

(4')

for the s e t s

Pk+l and
have to Thus

Rk+l. F i r s t condition is in
(i E- X )=(i
S '

ioE Xs U Ys for an a r b i t r a r y

Rk+l. In o r d e r

the second condition trary

)

prove that
i E X
0

r, s in
is
also

Rk+l valid

assume
i =i
0

r - 0 by &)

X ) for s io&Yr
0

..But

for

if we replace

s
X

by

r;

hence

i o E Xr

because otherwise

We show s i m i l a r l y that l a s t condition Letting elements which

(+)

is

i would belong t o o if i X then i X o r' o s analogous

. ~ h e Overification
is thus proved.

which is impossible. of the

k = n + 1 we optain is

that

X U Yr h a s m o r e than

a contradiction. Theorem

C E N T R O INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO (C. I. M. E. )

Abraham Robinson

PROBLEMS AND METHODS O F MODEL THEORY

C o r s o tenuto a V a r e n n a dal 9 a1 1 7 S e t + e m b r e 1968

PROBLE1:IS AND IETHODS OF NODEL THEORY

Abraham Robinson (Yale University)

1.

Introduction.

Over t h e l a s t c e n t u r y , t h e axiomaAccording t o t h i s

t i c approach h a s pervaded Isiathematics.

approach, a mathematical d i s c j p l i n e s t a r t s from a s p e c i f i e d

l i s t o f c o n d i t i o n s o r axioms, which a r e concerned w i t h a s e t

o f b a s i c n o t i o n s , o t h e r w i s e undefined. The d i s c i p l i n e t h e n c o n s i s t s of a d e t a i l e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e s which a r e models o f , i . e . question. which s a t i s f y , t h e system of axioms i n

I n o r d e r t h a t such s t r u c t u r e s nay be assumed t o

e x i s t , it i s n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e g i v e n s e t of axioms be devoid o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n s and t h i s i s proved e i t h e r a b s o l u t e l y , o r r e l a t i v e t o a n o t h e r s y s t e a , which i s i t s e l f supposed t o be devoid of c o n t r a d i c t i o n , o r e l s e it i s simply assuned. Model Theory r a i s e s t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n between a s e t o f axioms and i t s models t o a more general level. Thus, i n s t e a d of c o n s i d e r i n g a s p e c i f i c s e t

of axioms, one supposes o n l y t h a t t h e s e t o f axioms under

consideration,
K

i s expressed within a s p e c i f i e d formal

language, i n t h e first i n s t a n c e t h e Lower P r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s , and one t h e n i n v e s t i g a t e s t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n between t h e axioms of

K

and t h e s e t , o r v a r i e t y of models of

Although t h e r u l e s of d e d u c t i o n which a r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e f o r m a l - l a n g u a g e i n q u e s t i d n may p l a y a u s e f u l r o l e i n developi n g t h e t h e o r y , t h e s e r u . l e s a r e not e s s e n t i a l i n t h e p r e s e n t context. \"mat i s e s s e n t i a l h e r e i s a p r e c i s e d e l i m i t a t i o n

- 184 -

A. Robinson

of t h e r u l e s of formation of t h e language and t h e e x p l i c i t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e r u l e s by which a formula of t h e language i s i n t e r p r e t d i p a given s t r u c t u r e . Another prominent f e a t u r e of Nodel Theory i s t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e p r o p e r t i e s of s t r u c t u r e s which a r e d e r i v e d from a given s t r u c t u r e o r s t r u c t u r e s by s p e c i f i e d rules. To t h e e x t e n t t o which such m a t t e r s can be vade

d e f i n i t e , t h e d e r i v a t i o n of lfnewlf s t r u c t u r e s from lfoldl1 ones does n o t p e r t a i n s p e c i f i c a l l y t o Logic. Nevertheless t h e r e

a r e c e r t a i n c o n s t r u c t i o n s of t h i s kind v h i c h , f o r n a t u r a l r e a s o n s , have become prominent through Model Theory.

It happens f r e q u e n t l y i n t h e development of
Mathematics t h a t t h e e x p l i c i t c o n s i d e r a t i o n of c e r t a i n f e a t u r e s of mathematical thought which, i m p l i c i t l y , have been p r e s e n t f o r a long time p r e v i o u s l y , l e a d s t o g r e a t e r freedom i n t h e i r u s e , and t o t h e i r v a r i a t i o n and m u l t i p l i c a t i o n . Such h a s been t h e c a s e a l s o i n Model Theory and t h e r e e x i s t s by now a c o n s i d e r a b l e body of r e s u l t s i n c l a s s i c a l Mathematics which have been obtained by t h e use of model t h e o r e t i c methods. S e v e r a l r e s u l t s of nodern axiomatic S e t Theory cone under t h i s heading, but s i n c e a n o t h e r s e r i e s of l e c t u r e s i n t h i s summer meeting i s dedicated t o S e t Theory, we s h a l l not concern o u r s e l v e s with t h e s e r e s u l t s i n t h e prasent course. Instead

we s h a l l f o c u s a t t e n t i o n on t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of Node1 Theory t o Algebra. I n p a r t i c u l a r we s h a l l present a proof of a meta-

185 -

A. Robinson

mathematical theorem of J. Ax and S. Kochen which has become famous for yielding the solution of a problem of Z. Artin's.
2 .

Model theory ? h =e

Lower predicate calculus.

The basic syntacticaland model thsoretic notions of the Lower predicate calculus (LPC) will now be described briefly. The atomic symbols of the language are-- the individual object symbols, or individual constants, a, b, c,
j ..., cn, ck , ...,

constituting a set of sufficiently high cardinality, as required in each case (see below); a countable set;

--

the variables, x, y,

2 ,

--

relation symbols R( ) , S(

, , 1,

...

...
...,

divided into singulary or one plane, binary or two-place, n-ary or n-placa,

..., symbols, where each of these classes

--

is of fixed but sufficiently high cardinality;

connectives,

l(negation) , V(disdunction) , A (conjunction), 3(implication) ,

n (equivalence or biconditional) ;
(universal) and ( 3 )

-- quantifiers,( v ) (existential) -- brackets, [ and 1 .

From atomic synbols we constitute atomic formulas by entering n relation symbol. constants or variables into an n-place And from these atomic formulae t e obtain r

well formed formulae (wff) by means of the following rules.

A bracketed atomic formula is a wff.

Thus, if X and Y are arewff. in the parenthesis

[('J y)X]

is an atomic formula, [XI wff then If X [7X]

is a wff.

If X

[ X b Y J , [XVJ

[ X ~ Y ] , [XEY]

is a wff and

y does not occur in X

of a quantifier (is not quantified in X)

then

- 186

A. Robinson

and

[(;:y)X]

a r e vrff.

Thus, we a l l o w empty q u a n t i f i c a t i o n .

i s c a l l e d t h e scope of t h e q u a n t i f i e r

( 3y)

or

( V y)

i n t h e wff j u s t c o n s t r u c t e d , o r i n any o t h e r wff o b t a i n e d from it by f u r t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e above r u l e s .

A variable

is

free

i n a wff

if one o f .its o c c u r r e n c e s i n

is

o u t s i d e t h e scope 03 a q u a n t i f i e r .

A wff w i t h o u t f r e e v a r i a b l e s

i s a s e n t e n c e any o t h e r wff i s a p r e d i c a t e .
The b r a c k e t s , c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a trff.
[ and

display t h e

mode o f

It i s customary t o permit t h e i r
Thus we may vrrite and a l s o i n p l a c e

omission i f t h e r e s u l t i n g a m b i g u i t y , i f any, i s i r r e l e v a n t from t h e model t h e o r e t i c p o i n t o f view.

X1/k

X2n X3,

i n p l a c e of

of

CCX1t'X21 l X 3 1

[X1

[X2 \X3]]

Having d e f i n e d t h e n o t i o n of a language w i t h i n t h e Lower p r e d i c a t e c a l c u l u s , we i n t r o d u c e next t h e c o n c e p t of a ( f i r s t order r e l a t i o n a l ) s t r u c t u r e , s e t of i n d i v i d u a l s n

M

s h a l l consist of a n-placs r e l a t i o n s ,

t o g e t h e r w i t h a s e t of

which i s d e f i n e d on

In the set theoretic

approach, which predominates a t p r e s e n t , a r e l a t i o n is a s e t of o r d e r e d a s u b s e t of n - t u p l e s whose e l e m e n t s a r e t a k e n from

, i.e.

Afix.. .#A

(n

times)

I n t h i s framework,

e q u a l i t y may be r e g a r d e d a s j u s t a n o t h e r b i n a r y r e l a t i o n on
A

w i t h t h e p r o p e r t i e s of e q u i v a l e n c e and s u b s t i t u t i v i t y , n-ary f u n c t i o n may be expressed i n t e r m s of some For example, i n a group, t h e o p e r a t i o n

w h i l e any

( -1- 1 ) - p l a c e r e l a t i o n . n

of m u l t i p l i c a t i o n can be r e p r e s e n t e d by a t e r n a r y r e i a t i o n

,,

such t h a t

P(a,b,c)

h o l d s ( o r , seL t h e o r e t i c a l l y , such

- 187

A. Robinson

that

< a,b,c >

belongs t o

P) i f and o n l y i f

ab = c

I n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e whether o r n o t a g i v e n s e n t e n c e
X

i s t r u e i n a g i v e n s t r u c t u r e 74 we have t o assume t o b e g i n
11 h a s a name i n t h e -

w i t h t h a t e v e r y i n d i v i d u a l o r r e l a t i o n of language

which c o n t a i n s t h e s e n t e n c e i n q u e s t i o n .
C

More

p r e c i s e l y , we a s s u n e t h a t t h e r e i s a mapping s e t of t h e s e t of i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s o f elements of
A

from a sub-

onto t h e L onto

and from a s e t of r e l a t i o n symbols of

M

t h e r e l a t i o n s of a r e mapped on

such t h a t

n-place r e l a t i o n symbols For c e r t a i n purposes, it

n-ary r e l a t i o n s .
C
7 e !

i s convenient t o assLL+e t h a t
i n e s s e n t i a l a t t h i s point.

i s one-to-one b u t t h i s i s
s h a l l s a y t h a t a formula ( f o r t h e given

(atomic o r well-foraed) i s defined i n correspondence

C ) i f a l l i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s and r e l a t i o n
C

s p b o l s which o c c u r i n t h e formula belong t o t h e domain o f Let e.g. b

X
?

.
,

be a n a t o m i c formulae which i s d e f i n e d i n

X=R(a,b,c) b
?

I f , under

, R->R
X

,a->a
M

,
or,

->
?

,
,C
?

->

t h e n we s a y t h a t

holds i n

is true i n

M o r , i s s a t i s f i e d by bT if and only i f

<a

,b

>

belongs t o

R'

.
[XI

I n t h a t c a s e , we s a y a l s o
= [R(a,b,c)]

that t h e w e l l formed formula

ob$ained by b r a c k e t i n g

holds i n

.
M

which i s

Going on from

t h e r e , we d e f i n e s t e p - b y - s t x p ,

f o l l o w i n g t h e c o n s t r u c i i o n o f wff holds i n t h a t

whether o r n o t a wff which i s d e f i n e d i n structure. Specifically, if

X = [--I Y ]

then

X holds i n
holds i n

i f and o n l y i f

d o e s n o t hold i n

V ;, [X ,Y] i

188 M
if and only i f both

A. Robinson

and

Y h o l d i n M ; and s o f o r t h ,

i n accordance with t h e u s u a l t r u t h t a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n f o r t h e remaining connect' v e s . i Now suppose t h a t

X = [(

:-<z ) Y ( z ) 1

where we d i s p l a y

t h e o c c u r r e n c e s of t h e v a r i a b l e

Then

shall

hold
a

in such

i f and o n l y i f t h e r e e x i s t s an i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t
Y(a) holds i n
M
14.

that

F i n a l l y , if X = [ ( ~ z ) Y ( z ) ] t h e n Y(a) holds i n
C

holds i n

if and o n l y i f

for all

individual constants

i n t h e domain of

The r e a d e r w i l l observe t h a t we have used t e r m s l i k e "occurrence 02 a symbol i n a formula" w i t h o u t explanat i o n , r e l y i n g on h i s i n t u i t i v e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of such e x p r e s s i o n s . However, a more f o r m a l e x p l i c a t i o n of such t e r m s i s p o s s i b l e . There a r e a number of fundamental consequences of t h e above definitions, which w i l l now be g i v e n w i t h o u t proof. Thus, a s e n t e n c e which i s d e f i n e d i n
#

and t a u t o l o g o u s
[-(XVX]

i n t h e propositional calculus,must hold i n

, e,g.
and

h o l d s i n a l l s t r u c t u r e s i n which it i s defined. s e n t e n c e s of t h e Torn [ [ ( d z ) Y ( z ) ] 3 Y(a)]

Similarly [Y(a) 3 [ ( g z ) Y ( z ) ] Sentences

hold i n a l l s t r u c t u r e s i n which t h e y a r e ' d e f i n e d .

which h o l d i n a l l s t r u c t u r e s i n which t h e y a r e d e f i n e d a r e c a l l e d v a l i d s e n t e n c e s o r theorems ( s i n c e t h e y a r e theorems of t h e d e d u c t i v e p r e d i c a t e c a l c u l u s w i t h which we a r e n o t concerned h e r e ) . If

X

and and

[X 3 Y]

a r e theorems t h e n

i s a theorem; if X ( a )

Z a r e s e n t e n c e s such t h a t

- 189

A. Robinson

does not o c c u r i n

and

[X(a) 3 Z )

i s a theorem t h e n

[[(3 z ) Y ( z ) ]
on Y(a) and

3 Z]

i s a theorem; w i t h t h e same assumptions

if

[ Z 3 Y(a)]

i s a theorem

then

[ Z 3 [(Vz)Y(z)]]

i s a theorem.

A wff i s s a i d t o be i n p r e n e x normal form i f , i n

i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n , no a p p l i c a t i o n of a c o n n e c t i v e was preceded
by a q u a n t i f i c a t i o n . Typically,

i s i n prenex normal form, where

with f r e e v a r i a b l e s further quantifiers. such a n e x p r e s s i o n . x,y,z,rv,

Q(x,y,z,w)

is a predicate

vrhich d o e s not c o n t a i n a n y

From now on we s h a l l omit b r a c k e t s i n

Two s e n t e n c e s ,
s t a n t s and i f holds i n

and

a r e s a i d t o be equivalent

i f t h e y c o n t a i n t h e same r e l a t i o n symbols and i n d i v i d u a l con-

holds i n a s t r u c t u r e

i f and o n l y i f

The f o l l o v d n g u s e f u l r e s u l t can be proved

without d i f f i c u l t y .

2.2.

Theorem.

For every s e n t e n c e

there exists

an equivalent sentence Let associate with from

which i s i n prenex normal form. Ve i

be a s e n t e n c e i n prenex norinal form.

T a formal expression

a-Y

which i s o b t a i n e d

by o m i t t i n g its q u a n t i t i e s and by r e p l a c i n g each z which, o r i g i n a l l y , w a s q u a n t i f i e d e x i s t e n t i a l l y b(xl,

variable

by a f u n c t i o n symbol

..., x n )

whose

arguments,

- 190

Y
( )

A. Robinson

21

a r e j u s t t h o s e v a r i a b l e s which, i n

a r e conThus, i f

t a i n e d i n universal q u a n t i f i e r s preceding g i v e n by 2.1,

is

c y i s , up t o t y p o g r a p h i c a l v a r i a t i o n s .

Observe t h a t language.

o-'Y

i s n o t p a r t of t h e o r i g i n a l f o r m a l
Y

It i s c a l l e d t h e Skolem form of

To c o n t i n u e t h i s d i s c u s s i o n , we s h a l l f o r s i m p l i c i t y i d e n t i f y t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of a s t r u c t u r e c o n s t a n t s by which t h e y a r e denoted. basic definitions t h a t

1: w i t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l ~

It t h e n f o l l o w s from o u r

holds i n a structnre

i f and

o n l y i f t h e r e e x i s t a c t u a l f u n c t i o n s , which w i l l a g a i n be denoted by d(x) and l t - ( x , z )

such t h a t

holds i n

14

for a l l individuals

and

of

However,

i n g e n e r a l , thes.3 f u n c t i o n s a r e n o t u n i q u e l y d e f i n e d and t h e i r d e t e r m i n a t i o n r e q u i r e s t h e axiom o f choice. define b(x) and q " ( x , z ) on Thus, i n o r d e r t o a in

we choose f o r each

an individual

c = b(a)

such t h a t

holds i n then pick

and having chosen so that

and f i x e d

z =b

we

d ='I.-(a,c)

- 191 -

A. Robinson

holds i n

The procedure i s q u i t e s i m i l a r i n t h e g o n e r a l

c a s e except t h a t i f

b e g i n s with a n e x i s t e n t i a l q u a n t i f i e r

o r q u a n t i f i e r s t h e n t h e corresponding f u n c t i o n s reduce t o constants. The f u n c t i o n s & ( x ,) 7 1 r ( x , z )

, etc.

are called

Skolem f u n c t i o n s . Let
K

be a s e t of sentences.

The s e t of r e l a t i o n

symbols and i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s which o c c u r i n t h e s e n t e n c e s

of

w i l l be c a l l e d t h e y o c a b u l a r y of
of

A sentence X

is i n

the - vocabulary

i f a l l t h e r e l a t i o n symbols and i n d i v i d u a l

c o n s t a n t s c o n t a i n e d i n it belong t o t h e vocabulary of

i s c a l l e d c o n s i s t e n t i f it p o s s e s s e s a model i.e.
which s a t i s f i e s a l l s e n t e n c e s of t i o n of t h e vocabulary of

a structure

under t h e same i n t e r p r e t a -

.
i n vrhich t h e s e n t e n c e s o f
C)

A sentence
sentences

is s a i d t o be a consequence of a s e t of

K if.-.'evarystructure M

i i

{X) a r e d e f i n e d (by means of a correspondence

K

and which
A s e t of

s a t i s f i e s a l l s e n t e n c e s of sentences

, satisfies
X

also

i s c a l l e d complete i f f o r e v e r y s e n t e n c e X
K
and
1 1 .

in

t h e v o c a b u l a r y of Let

either

o r 7X

i s a consequence of

i s an e x t e n s i o n of

P' I

b e two s t r u c t u r e s such t h a t That i s t o s a y , i f

and

At

are

t h e s e t s of i n d i v i d u a l s of

and
14

?I r e s p e c t i v e l y t h e n .

A C A'
t i o n s of

and t h e r e l a t i o n s o f

' IJi

a r e o b t a i n e d from t h e r e l a -

by r e s t r i c t i d n t o

t h e o r e t i c symbol an extension of

' M C Ei

W use t h e ordinary s e t e

i n order t o indicate t h a t
K

M '

is

Let

be t h e s e t of a l l s e n t e n c e s

- 192 -

A. Robinson

which h o l d i n

14 i n a vocabulary which i n c l u d e s symbols f o r

a l l r e l a t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s of a n elem3ntary e x t e n s i o n of also i n

W say t h a t e

M'

is
hold

i f a l l s e n t e n c e s of

M '

I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , 5.t i s supposed t h a t t h e
M

i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s which denote elements of t h e i r meaning on p a s s i n g from

retain

M t o bl

.
M

For t h e d i s c u s s i o n of o u r next d e f i n i t i o n , it i s convenient t o assume t h a t t h e r e i s a one-to-one correspondence between t h e i n d i v i d u a l s o f a g i v e n s t r u c t u r e , symbols which d e n o t e them.

and t h e

T h i s w i l l be t h e c a s e , f o r

example, i f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of t h e diagram
D

denote themselves.

Then

of

i s d e f i n e d a s t h e s e t of a l l s e n t e n c e s
which hold i n
R

of one o f t h e forms Xor[7X]

X = [R(al,

where

..., a n ) ]

f o r any
M

,a

,a

which d e n o t e Any s t r u c t u r e

r e l a t i o n s o r i n d i v i d u a l s of

, respectively.
EI' 3 M

M'
of

which i s a model o f

i s t h e n isomorphic t o a n e x t e n s i o n i s a model o f
3

a n d , c o n v e r s e l y , any s t r u c t u r e

f o r t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e v o c a b u l a r y of

As s t a t e d , we s h a l l t r e a t t h e r e l a t i o n of e q u a l i t y

E(x,y)

a s an ordinary binary r e l a t i o n .
M

When d i s c u s s i n g t h e

c a r d i n a l i t y of a s t r u c t u r e

w i t h e q u a l i t y , we s h a l l ,

hohrever, mean t h e c a r d i n a l i t y o f t h e e q u i v a l e n c e c l a s s a s of
I ~ I tgith r e s p e c t t o
;id
I

S i m i l a r l y we s h a l l , where a p p r o p r i a t e ,

two s t r u c t u r e s a s isomorphic i f t h e isomorphism between

ix~x-

,,lays t h o s e e q u i v a l e n c e r a t h e r t h a n t h e i n d i v i d u a l e l e n e n t s .

- 193 -

A. Robinson

3.

Ultraproducts.

Let

be an a r b i t r a r y s e t .

non-empty s e t of s u b s e t s of

,D ,

i s c a l l e d a f i l t e r i f it

possesses t h e following properties:

3.1.
3.2.

If

A, B E D
A E D ,

then

AnR E D then

.
BED

If

A C B C I ,

3.3.
D

ddD
i s c a l l e d a n u l t r a f i l t e r i f it i s a f i l t e r and

i f , i n addition

3.4.

If

A C I

and

A & D

then

I -AED

It i s knovm t h a t e v e r y f i l t e r c a n be r e t u r n e d t o an
u l t r a f i l t e r by a s i n g l e a p p l i c a t i o n of Now l e t Z c r n ' s lemma.

[
I =

be a s e t of s t r u c t u r e s indexed i n
[j)

a non-empty s e t

and l e t

be a s e t of i n d i v i d u a l

c o n s t a n t s and r e l a t i o n symbols i n a g i v e n language t h e r e be g i v e n mappings and r e l a t i o n s o f

R

. .

Let

, C

from

i n t o individual constants n-place r e l a t i o n symbol

R,

M,,

such t h a t every

in
D

i s mapped on

n-place r e l a t i o n s

i n .M ,

Let

be any u l t r a f i l t e r on

=KI~~./Dc a l i e d ,
D M

W d e f i n e a new s t r u c t u r e e

t h e u l t r a p r o d u c t of

[,] M,

with respect t o
A

the ultrafilter of that

a s follows.

The s e t of i n d i v i d u a l s f (,.) w i t h domain

c o n s i s t s of a l l functions

f(,;) E ML

.
R
t

Also, l e t

R = R(xl,

n-place r e l a t i o n sym3ol i n r P n-ary r e l a t i o n by of

..., xn)

such

be any

With

we a s s o c i a t e a n

( t h e r e l a t i o n which i s denoted
fl,

R ) by p o s t u l a t i n g t h a t f o r any

..., f n E A

the

n-tuple set

< fl,

..., f n > .

belongs t o

R'

i f and o n l y i f t h e

belongs t o

W s h a l l u s e t h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n i n o r d e r t o prove e
t h e f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t , which may be regarded a s t h e fundamental p r i n c i p l e of Model Theory.

3.5.
consistent (i.e., Then
K

Compactness Theorem.

Let

b e a non-empty

s e t o f s e n t e n c e s such t h a t e v e r y f i n i t e s u b s e t o f

is

p o s s e s s e s a model, s e e s e c t i o n 2 above).

is consistent.
Proof. Our theorem i s t r i v i a l . i f
K

is f i n i t e .

Suppose now t h a t of

i s i n f i n i t e and t h a t e v e r y f i n i t e s u b s e t

p o s s e s s e s a model.

Fle s h a l l c o n s t r u c t a p a r t i c u l a r

u l t r a p r o d u c t and s h a l l prove t h a t it is a model o f a s u i t a b l e i n t e r p ~ e t a t i o nof t h e v o c a b u l a r y of W t a k e t h e s e t of f i n i t e s u b s e t s of e index s e t 8).

K

(under

a s the

I =

{ I ]

Thus

L>E

i s a f i n i t e s u b s e t of

.
C
[I}

Using t h e axiom of c h o i c e we choose f o r each z - a s t r u c t u r e

M , .

which i s a model of

J-.'

Also, we d e f i n e of a l l d,,

d+.= { p E I

and we c o n s i d e r t h e s e t

Do

d e f i n e d i n t h i s way,

Do - (dL1 E . ,
then
Do A = d,.

1
d o e s n o t c o n t a i n t h e empty s e t f o r i f f o r some L: E I and s o
s E A :

A E Do

Also, i f

- 195

A. Robinson

A E Do

and

B E Do
SO

SO

that

A = d,,

B = dp

then
Do

AnB = dL V p

that

A 9 B E Do

These p r o p e r t i e s of

e n t a i l immediateiy t h a t t h e s e t

Dl = [X
is a f i l t e r on
e x t e n s i o n of -Dl lemma.

c I

There e x i s t s

Y E Do

such t h a t

Y C X]

. Let D be a n u l t r a f i l t e r which i s a n . Such a n u l t r a f i l t e r e x i s t s , by Z o r n t s

S

Indeed, l e t

be t h e s e t of a l l f i l t e r s on
Dl.

which a r e e x t e n s i o n s of

i s p a r t i a l l y o r d e r e d under
S'

i n c l u s i o n and any t o t a l l y o r d e r e d s u b s e t upper bound i n S

of

has an

, i.e.

t h e union of t h e elemerits o f S

'

Hence, Z o r n t s lemma i s applilcable and element, let to

D I

c o n t a i n s a maximal For

say.

\Je c l a i m t h a t

i s an u l t r a f i l t e r . A
nor

and suppose t h a t n e i t h e r

belongs

Consider t h e s e t

D'={XCI
D'

XDAnY
D
t

f o r some

YED] A
as

i s a proper extension of
D

s i n c e it c o n t a i n s

w e l l a s t h e e l e m e n t s of and 3 . 2 .

.
D

Also, it p o s s e s s e s p r o p e r t i e s 3.1 c o n t a i n s t h e empty s e t .

Y C I

Suppose now t h a t f o r some

I D
t

Then

AqY =

Y E D

and hence t h a t and shows t h a t

A E D

. .

But t h i s i m p l i e s t h a t

T h i s c o n t r a d i c t s o u r assumption
D' E S

s a t i s f i e s a l s o 3.3,

i n t u r n c o n t r a d i c t s t h e maximality o f that
D
is an u l t r a f i l t e r . :

in

. S .

But t h i s W conclude e

Let

M =

T.>/D x

and l e t 1

be t h e v o c ~ b u l a r yof lrfiich occurs: i n

F o r every r e l a t i o n s p b o l

..., X )

.
-

- 196 -

A. Robinson

vie choose t h e image dence

CJ,

.I

of

in

, l E

under t h c cor.resp;ilR

a s t h e g i v e n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

in

NJ, i f

o c c u r s i n a t l e a s t one of t h e s e r i t e n c e s of v choose
Rz/

And we

a s an a r b i t r a r y

n-ary r e l a t i o n i n

My

if

does not occur i n a in

P

S i m i l a r l y , f o r any i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t a,
if

we choose t h e image a in

of a

under C>,I a s t h e g i v e n
v

i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

My

occurs i n

and

a r b i t r a r y i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e case.
f): ,(

And we t h e n t a k e
a

= a,,

,
Let

E I

a s t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of

in

.
K

X X

be any s e n t e n c e i n t h e v o c a b u l a r y of holds i n

, 'P

W claim t h a t e

M I

i f and o n l y i f t h e s e t

3.6.
belongs t o
K

S(X) = l o

IX
=

holds i n

Mr]
M
i s a model of
d , is the
X

.
P

T h i s vrill e s t a b l i s h t h a t and l e t
2-!

For l e t

X E K

[XI

Then

s e t of a l l f i n i t e s u b s e t s of
X

which c o n t a i n

holds i n

for all db 6 D

p E d,,;

t h e same time

Accordingly, and at

Hence

S(X) 3 dl;

This proves
X

S(X) E D
bf

a n d , by t h e

above c l a i m , shows t h a t

holds i n

.
M

W f i r s t supplsment e

by iniiroducing i n d i v i d u a l

c o n s t a n t s t o d e n o t e t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of do n o t

,f
t

6 A

which
P

correspond t o any of t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s of
P'

Let t h e r e s u l t i n g s e t be

and l e t

a E P
f E A

of t h e a d d i t i o n a l c o n s t a n t s , d e n o t i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the value of f a i n any

be any one

W del"i.ne t h a t e

M , ,

s h a l l be j u s t f
(J;)

i n that structure,

197 -

A. Robinson

Ke s h a l l now show t h a t . f o r any belongs t o belongs t o P

1

whose vocabplar-y

(and hence f o r ariy holds i n

M

whose vocabulary S(X)

P) , X

i f and o n l y i f

as g i v e n by 3.6, belongs t o
Suppose first t h a t
X = [R(al,

D
X

.
i s a b r a c k e t e d atomic s e n t e n c e ,
Now suppose t h a t we have proved i t i n t h e vocabulary

..., a n ) ]
X

t h e n our a s s e r t i o n follovrs d L r e c t l y
M

from t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f f o r two s e n t e n c e s ,
if

and

P'

Then

holds i n

M
I

S(X) G ' D

, hence
X

S(biX]) = I

S(X)
1 1 .

d o e s n o t belong t o S(X)

D ; while i f

does n o t hold i n belongs t o

X D

and s o

S(X) = S([;X]) [7X]

proves o u r a s s e r t i o n Tor in

This

If

and and s o

both hold S([XAY])

then

S(X) D

= S(X) ~9 S(Y) E D
holds i n
M

S(Y) E D

T h i s p r o v e s our a s s e r t i o n i f
[X

[X A Y]
suppose,

If

Y]

d o e s n o t hold i n
X

w i t h o u t l o s s of g e n e r a l i t y t h a t Then

does n o t hold i n

.
D

S(X) E D

otherwise

E D

.
W

and s o

S([X<\Y]) = S ( X ) . ) S ( Y )

&

This proves our a s s e r t i o n i f

[X .IY]

d o e s n o t hold i n

There i s no d i f f i c u l t y i n r e a c h i n g

corresponding c o n c l u s i o n s f o r t h e remaining c o n n e c t i v e s (e.g. by u s i n g t h e i r d ' e f i n i t i o n x i n t e r m s of n e g a t i o n and c o n j u n c t i o n ) . Suppose now t h a t

?

X = [('fy)Z(y)]

and t h a t o u r a s s e r t i o n Z(a)
14 f

h a s been proved f o r a l l s e n t e n c e s of t h e form vocabulary b e l o n g s t o holds i n

whose Z(a)
A

P a

.
.

If

holds i n

then of

f o r some

d e n o t i n g o u r element I u - l ~ ( a ) holds i n

It f o l l o w s t h a t t h e s e t

Mr]

belongs t o

- 198 -

A. Robinson

D where, f o r any
[o-lz(a)

r I

denotes

f (a-)

But

holds i n

Itc)

c [ c / B , 3 y ) ~ ( y ) ] h o l d s i n ]M ,

and s o t h e s e t on t h e r i g h t hand s i d e a l s o b e l o n g s t o Conversely, if

?

.
D

[o- 1 [ j y ) Z ( y ) I h o l d s i n Mu. )
bu,

belongs t o

,
D

then t h e r e e x i s t individual constants

denoting i n d i v i d u a l s

be

in

Mc
f

such t h a t

{o- I ~ ( b d h o l d s i n Mo-) belongs t o

= buf

Define

E A by
P ' Ma-

f (0-)

and l e t in

be t h e i n d i v i d u a l Then

constant i n

which d e n o t e s

denotes ba, f o r some

D

bc

s)

in

(and may, o r may n o t , c o i n c i d e w i t h

It follovrs t h a t
Z(a) holds i n

[ u-

Iz(a)

holds i n

MJ

belongs t o
M .

and s o

M , [(3y)Z(y)] holds i n

A similar

argument e s t a b l i s h e s o u r a s s e r t i o n i f

X = [ ( V y ) Z ( y )1

The

g e n e r a l v a l i d i t y of o u r c l a i m now f o l l o w s s t e p - b y - s t e p f o l l o w i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a s e n t e n c e i n t h e Lower p r e d i c a t e c a l c u l u s , e.g. by u s i n g i n d u c t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e number of b r a c k e t s

i n t h e sentence. T h i s completes t h e proof of 3.5. Let

be any s t r u c t u r e and l e t

be a n u l t r a f i l t e r

on a n a r b i t r a r y non-empty i n d e x s e t

is t h e n d e f i n e d a s t h e u l t r a p r o d u c t
a r e c o p i e s of
t4

M = '

rr L&

The u l t r a p o w e r

M I/D
I.ld

where t h e
M

M '
in

may be regarded a s an e x t e n s i o n of
?

if we i d e n t i f y any i n d i v i d u a l

function

f (v) = a

of

w i t h t h e co,ns:ant

A method which i s v e r y s i m i l a r t o t h a t used i n t h e

proof of 3.5.

shows

--

- 199 3.7.
structure
1 . 1

A'. Robinson

Theoren. Then

Let

M = M'/D '

be an u l t r a p o r i e r o f t h e
1I .

i s an elementary e x t e n s i o n of

.
W

An u l t r a f i l t e r i s s a i d t o be f i x e d i f it c o n s i s t s of

a l l subsets of
However, i f filters.

t h a t contain a fixed
D

a E I

It i s n o t

d i f f i - k t t o verify t h a t f o r fixed

M'/D

reduces t o

.
I

i s i n f i n i t e t h e n it p o s s e s s e s a l s o f r e e u l t r a -

To s e e t h i s l e t

Do

be t h e s e t o f a l l s u b s e t s o f

whose complements i n

are finite.

It i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o s e e t h a t
which i s

Do

is a f i l t e r .

An argument used p r e v i o u s l y , i n t h e proof of

3.5.

shows t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a n u l t r a f i l t e r
Do

on

an extension of f i n i t e subsets of Let

.
I.
24

is f r e e s i n c e it d o e s not c o n t a i n any

be t h e s e t of a l l s e n t e n c e s which h o l d i n a n

infinite structure symbol E(x,y)

i n a vocabulary which i n c l u d e s a r e l a t i o n

denoting t h e i d e n t i t y i n

Thus

includes

s e n t e n c e s which a s s e r t t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n denoted by

E(x,y) i s
that

r e f l e x i v e , symmetrical, t r a n s i t i v e , and s u b s t i t u t i v e , i.e.

t

e q u a l elements can be s u b s t i t u t e d f o r one a n o t h e r i n a l l r e l a t i o n s of index s e t

I.? I

Consider t h e u l t r a p o w a r

I ~ I ~ / D 121 =

,
M

where t h e

coincides with

and

is a f r e e u l t r a f i l t e r .

Then we c l a i m t h a t

i s a proper e x t e n s i o n of
a

.
!./I

To s e e t h i s , l e t of
lvlt

denote t h e p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l for a l l holds i n b in

t

which i s g i v e n by

E(b) = b X(a,c)

By t h e

d e f i n i t i o n of a n u l t r a p o w e r d e n o t i n g a n element of t a k e s a fixed value i n

for

c
b

M(or, s o r e p r e c i s e l y , a f u n c t i o n vrhich
9i)

i f and o n l y i f t h e s e t o f

for

- 200

A . Robinson

which

f(b)

i s denoted b:.
D

belongs t o

But t h i s s e t c o n t a i

only a s i n g l e individual of free -u l t r a f i l t e r

M and hence, cannot belong t o t h s

The above argument p r o v i d e s a seemingly "concrete" c o n s t r u c t i o n of a p r o p e r e l e n e n t a r y e x t e n s i o n of any g i v e n i n f i n i t e structure.

A s i m p l e r argument s u f f i c e s i f we a r e o n l y

i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e e x i s t e n c e of such e x t e n s i o n s o r , more genera l l y , i n t h e e x i s t e n c e of a r b i t r a r y l a r g e e x t e n s i o n . same assumptions on VJith t h e

and

a s b e f o r e , we a r e going t o prove

3.8.

Theorem ("Upv~ard L~wenhcim-Skolemt? )

t

. Let
1 . 1

c a r d i n a l number which i s g r e a t e r t h a n t h e c a r d i n a l o f

be -

any

P? Z m .
that Let

Then t h e r e e x i s t s an elementary e x t e n s i o n

1 4

of

such t h a t

Proof.

By assumption, M 2 k",o

.
-

W have t o show e
m

p o s s e s s e s models ofnose c a r d i n a l i t y i s a% l e a s t

A = [a,]

be a s e t o f i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s which do n o t
K

belong t o t h e vocabulary of

such t h a t

A =m

(This

i m p l i e s t h a t we choose o u r language l a r g e enough t o c o n t a i n a set

of t h i s kind;
P

Let

FI

be t h e s e t of a l l s e n t e n c e s a r e d i f f e r e n t e l e n e n t s of
Kj H

[lE(a, , a

)I

vrhere

a j and

fi

W a r e going t o show t h a t t h e s e t e

is consistent.

According t o t h e compactness theorem, 3.5, we only have t o show t h a t every f i n i t e s u b s e t of

KJ H

K'L/

R'

say,

i s c o n s i s t e n t , where

K'

and

wc have t o f i n d a model of
.c, s.22

' ' K v H .

H'

are finite.

Thai i s t o say,
1
Y

But it i s n o t d i f f i c u l t
i (

that

T.?

i t s e l f can s e r v e a s a model o f

v H for

201

A . Robinsori

a s u i t a b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e vocabulary of t h a t s e t .
s t a n t s and r e l a t i o n symbols of
I

Fcr

t h i s purpose, we o n l y have t o i n t e r p r e t t h e i n d i v i d u a l conK'

as i n

while

E(X,~)

d e n o t e s t h e i d e n t i t y , a s b e f o r e , and t h e f i n i t e s e t of individh,: c o n s t a n t s which occur i n

i s p u t i n one-to-one correspondcnce

w i t h a f i n i t e s e t of i n d i v i d u a l s of

Observe t h a t , e x c e p t
1

f o r i t s c a r d i n a l i t y t h e c h o i c e of t h i s s e t i s q u i t e a r b i t r a r y . Thus
K
u

i s c o n s i s t e n t and p o s s e s s e s a model
1.I).

(which may
M
1

be t a k e n a s a n e x t e n s i o n o f

The c a r d i n a l i t y of a,, of
A

is

at l e a s t

s i n c e t h e elements
&I1

d i f f e r e n t elements i n

must d e n o t e

4.

C o m ~ l e t e n e s sand model c o m ~ l e t e n e s s , F o r t h e

p r e s e n t s e c t i o n , it w i l l be convenient t o assume t h a t t h e u n d e r l y i n g correspondence between i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s and thy: i n d i v i d u a l s denoted by them i s one-to-one. W r e c a l l t h a t a s e t of s e n t e n c e s e complete if f o r e v e r y s e n t e n c e either
K

i s callec?
K

i n t h e vocabulary of

o r -IX i s a consequence o f

A r e l a t e d notion

which h a s proved v e r y u s e f u l i n 140del Theory w i l l now be i n troduced. L e t t h e s e t of s e n t e n c e s

be non-empty and c o n s i s t s n t
?Io f

w i l l be c a l l e d model-complete i f f o r e v e r y model

w i t h diagram

the s e i

KG D
K

i s complete.

It i s a s s w - e d
a

h e r e t h a t t h e v o c a b u l a r i e s of Thus, i f

and

a r e compatible.

c o n t a i n s an i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t

denoting

- 202 -

A . Robinson

an element of in
D

then

w i l l denote t h e sane element a l s o

If of
K

i s model complete, and

M'

and

M?

a r e models
X

such t h a t

i s an extension of

then if

is
must
KV D K

any sentence i n t h e vocabulary of of t h e diagram

D
1

EI ( i . e . i n t h e vocabulary
is true i n M
and
M'

of

M) and X
M

then

be t r u e a l s o i n 14 Hence,

s i n c e both

a r e models of

M'

is an elementary extension o f
of
K

& Conversely . i f I

.
,

supposed non-empty and c o n s i s t e n t , i s such t h a t f o r any model of k

M

and any extension

PI

of

M which i s a model
M

M'

i s an elementary extension of

then

is

model-complete. The n o t i o n s of'completeness and of model-com~leteness a r e n o t comparable, i.e. t h e r e a r e s e t s of s e n t e n c e s

which

a r e complete but not model-complete and o t h e r s t h a t a r e modelcomplete but not complete. n o t i o n of model-completeness
A sentence

I n many a l g e b r a i c a p p l i c a t i o n s , t h e

i s perhaps more c e n t r a l .

i s c a l l e d p r i m i t i v e i f it i s i n prenex

normal form with e x i s t e n t i a l q u a n t i f i e r s only, i f any, and i f

i t s m a t r i x c o n s i s t s of a conjunction of bracketed atomic

formulae and ( o r ) of t h e n e g a t i o n s of such formulae. 4.1. Theorem (The model cornnleteness t e s t ) . Let
K

be a non-empty and c o n s i s t e n t s e t of sentences.

I n order t h a t

be model complete it i s necessary and s u f f i c i e n t t h a t i f

is a model of

K and X i s a p r i m i t i v e sentence i n t h e

- 203 -

A. Robinson

vocabulary of

M which h o l d s i n some s t r u c t u r e M 3 M t h a t '

K

i s a model of

then

holds already i n

itself.

Proof. s a t i s f i e d but t h a t

N e c e s s i t y i s obvious.

I n o r d e r t o prove

s u f f i c i e n c y suppose t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n of t h e theorem i s
K

i s n o t model-complete.

I n t h a t case,
D

t h e r e e x i s t a model

of
I\I

with diagran of

and a s e n t e n c e

i n t h e v o c a b u l a r y of

(i.e.

D)

such t h a t n e i t h e r

n o r -;X

i s $ e d u c i b l e from

KLD

S i n c e f o r every s e n t e n c e

t h e r e i s an e q u i v a l e n t s e n t e n c e i n prenex normal form we may suppose t h a t

i s i n p r e n e x normal form.

Moreover,

must

c o n t a i n a t l e a s t one q u a n t i f i e r , f o r i f n o t t h e n t h e f a c t t h a t

X ( o r ;X)

holds i n

W would e n t a i l t h a t X
K

( o r 7X) h o l d s

a l s o i n a l l e x t e n s i o n s of

.
X
begins with an existen-

W may even assume t h a t e t i a l quantifier. outset so t h a t

X

Suppose t h a t t h i s i s n o t t h e c a s e from t h e b e g i n s w i t h a u n i v e r s a l q u a n t i f i e r , e.g.

where

d o e s n o t c o n t a i n any q u a n t i f i e r s .

Then it i s a

c l a s s i c a l f a c t , which can e a s i l y be v e r i f i e d d i r e c t l y , t h a t 7X

is equivalent t o

X'

shares with

t h e property t h a t neither
KU D PI

X'

nor ; X

'

is

a consequence of

Thus t h e r e e x i s t o r d e r e d p a i r s

< M,X >

such t h a t

i s a node1 of

w i t h diagram

204 -

A. Robinson

and of

X D

i s a s e n t e n c e i n Frenex nornial form i n t h e vocabulary

which b e g i n s t s i t h an e x i s t e n t i a l q u a n t i f i e r such t h a t
X

neither

nor

7X

i s a consequence of

.
Let

Among a l l

t h e s e p a i r s we choose one, of q u a n t i f i e r s i n
X1

< 1.5, X1 >

such t h a t t h e number

is a s small a s possible.

X1 = (:!y)Q(y)
Let

where

Q may c o n t a i n f u r t h e r q u a n t i f i e r s .
M1

Dl

be t h e diagram o f

.
M1 -

S i n c e 7X1

i s not
K1-D1

a consequence of
which s a t i s f i e s
t

K L D ~ t h e r e e x i s t s a model
X1

of
Dl

And s i n c e

lfll

i s a model of

we
?

may suppose t h a t it i s a n e x t e n s i o n of
X1

The f a c t t h a t

holds i n

M
a

shovrs t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s an i n d i v i d u a l i n s a y , such t h a t
Q(a)

denoted by

holds i n
X1

Q ( a ) contaf.ns l e s s q u a n t L f i e r s t h a n either Q(a) or

"?(a) I
t

.
But

But

It f o l l o t r s t h a t Kd D
t
t

i s a consequence of

D'

i s t h e diagram o f

D' 3 Dl

where

iQ(a) cannot be

a consequence of
Q(a) consequence of

since

Q ( a ) holds i n

Hence

i s a consequence o f
Kui)
?

K ~ D ' and, a f o r t i o r i ,
?

X1

is a

This implies t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a

f i n i t e number of e l e m e n t s of

X1 i s a conszqusnce of t o t h e same, such t h a t

ii

,Z

IZ1,

..., Z J.] ...

s a y such t h a t j o r , which amounts

i s a consequence of

Put

Z1 A

AZ

= Z (al,

...., a k )
1 ;

where we have displ.ayed gn?-y t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s vrhich do n o t occur in

Dl,

i.e.

vrhich do n o t denote e l e r z n t s of

Then i t f o l l o w s fro:;i cna of t h e r u l e s of d e d u c t i o n qucted i n s e c t i o n 2 , and can al.so be v e r i f i e d d i r s c t l y t h a t t h e

A. Robinson

sentence

i s a consequence of
so that Then Y

KuD1

Put
1

= (:iyl)...(~:yk)~(yl,

...,Y k )

i s a p r i m i t i v e s e n t e n c e i n t h e vocabulary o f
iil

K wD1

h o l d s i n t h e model

of

K!,Dl

and s o

must be

a consequence of But t h e n X1

K .. Dl

by t h e c o n d i t i o n of Theorem 4.1.
KwD1

i s a consequence of
X1

by 4.3, which i s

c o n t r a r y t o o u r a s s u x p t i o n s on

T h i s proves 4.1.

I n c e r t a i n c i r c m ~ s t a n c e s ,model-completeness e n t a i l s completeness.

I n o r d e r t o formul-ate a r e s u l t i n t h i s
4

d i r e c t i o n we i n t r o d u c a t h e n o t i o n of a prime model. structure sentences

1, 4

w i l l be ca.lled a prime model of a s e t c f if No

i s a model o f

and i f any model of

i s isomorphic t o a n e x t e n s i o n o f

M , .
i s modcl-complete and t h a t
K

4.4. Theorem.

Suppose t h a t t h e non-eapty and

c o n s i s t e n t s e t of s e n t e n c a s

it p o s s e s s e s a p r i n e model.
Proof. satisfied, l e t

Then

i s complete.

Supposing t h a t t h e assumptjons of 1.L a r e &Io be a n o d e l of K w i t h diagram K 30 K

be any s e n t e n c e i n t h o vocabulary of

.
4

L PT,

Since

is
,0 0

model-complete e i t h e r

or

"X
PI

i s a consequericc ; ;
of K

and vre may suppose uit!!o~?t l o s s of g e n e r a l i t y t h a t sb

i ,r

I-r

i s t h e case.

Sj.nce e v e r y model f.io

i s lac-mr;- ic , ,
-3.

a n e x t e n s i o n of

M may be r e g a r d e d a s

- 3 ~ ~ 1 ;f

'

- 206
It f o l l o w s t h a t X
models of
K

A. Robinson

holds also i n

1 . I

Thus,
K

holds i n a l l

i s a consequence of

T h i s proves 4.4.

Many a p p l i c a t i o n s and e l a b o r a t i o n s of t h e s e n o t i o n s

w i l l b e found i n r e f e r e n c e s 1 6 and 17.

have been a p p l i e d by t o t h e t h e o r y of p-adic numbers.

More r e c e n t l y t h e y

Ax-Kochen ( r e f s . 1 , 2 ) and Yershov ( r e f . 2 2 ) Here we s h a l l be c o n t e n t

w i t h a simple example vrinich i l l u s t r a t e s some b a s i c f e a t u r e s o f t h e method. The n o t i o n of a n o r d e r e d a b e l i a n g r o u c which c o n t a i n s more t h a n one element can be axiomatized w i t h o u t d i f f i c u l t y by a f i n i t e s e t of s e n t e n c e s t h e r e l a t i o n symbols and S(x,y,z) ( f o r x
KO

whose vocabulary c o n s i s t s of

E(x,y) ( f o r x = y )

y = z)

Q(x,y) (for

x C y)

W s h a l l be concerned more e

p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h t h e t h e o r y of d i v i s i b l e o r d e r e d a b e l i a n groups. any a An a b e l i a n group

G
i s s a i d t o be d i v i s i b l e i f f o r

a 6 G

and f o r any p o s i t i v e i n t e g e r suchthat a

PO

2 2 t h e r e exFsts
n times)

b c G

(i.e. n

b + b +

is e q u a l t o
and S(x,y,z)

. .

... + b .

For g i v e n
Xn

t h i s ~ r o p e r t ycan e a s i l y be E(x,y)

expressed by a s e n t a n c e

formulated i n t e r m s o f

Then t h e s e t

c o n s t i t u t e s a s e t o f "axiomsu ( s e n t e n c e s ) f o r t h e n o t i o n of a d i v i s i b l e ordered a b e l i a n group urllikh c o n t a i n s more t h a n one element. Let for n

G

be a model o f

and suppose t h a t a =b

na = nb na = nb

2 2

Then! we c l a i n t h a t

Indeed,

- 207

A. Robinson

entails

n(a-b) = 0 (a-b)

, i.e.
+

(a-b)

... + ( a - b )
Then b

(n times)

Now suppose assumption.

-b>0.

n(a-b)

>

contrary t o

Ruling o u t

conclude t h a t a = b

.
K

>

i n a s z m i l a r way, we

4.5. TheorProof. iet

i s model-complete.
Let
G

??e a p p l y 4.1.

be a model o f

K G

and

be any p r i m i t i v e s e n t e n c e i n t h e vocabulary o f

such t h a t model of

h o l d s i n some e x t e n s i o n

G'

of

which i s a

For t h e s a k e ~f s i m p l i c i t y , we s h a l l i d e n t i f y
G

t h e e l e m e n t s of a r e denoted.

and

G'

w i t h t h e symbols by which t h e y
Y

Suppose t h a t

i s g i v e n by

where

d o e s n o t c o n t a i n any f u r t h e r q u a n t i f i e r s . a

There

e x i s t elements holds i n s i v e l y by

G'

.
and

of

G'

such t h a t

Define subgroups

G o

Q(al, of

' M

..., a n )
succes-

Go = G

where

r a n g e s o v a r t h e e l e m e n t s of Thus i f

Gk-l

and where rak

r
a

ranges

over t h e r a t i o n a l nurbers. i n t e g e r and

r =

i s an

is a positive integer then

c E G' al, such t h a t

is defined

as t h e unique
Since follows t h a t

PC = aak

.
G

Q(al,

...

..., a k
,,

a r e a l l contained i n

it
Gn

an)

and hence

holds i n

208 -

A. Robinson

If

holds i n

Go = G
Gk

t h e r e i s n o t h i n g t o prove.
Y

I f not,

there exists a Gk-l

such t h a t Then ak

holds i n

Gk

but not i n
Gk,l

, 1 <_

cannot be c o n t a i n e d i n

f o r otherwise

Gk = Gk-l
G"

.
be any o r d e r e d a b e l i a n group which and which c o n t a i n s a n element
Gk,l
b

Now l e t

i s a n e x t e n s i o n of
such t h a t f o r any
b

Gk,l

,
ak

the inequality

<t

or
Gk,l

>t

holds according a s
G"

<

or

ak

>

holds i n

Then

c o n t a i n s a subgroup which i s o r d e r isomorphic Gk ' Indeed, consider t h e

( i s o m o r p h i c a s an o r d e r e d group) t o mapping

from

into

G"

.
t

It i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o s e e t h a t t h i s

mapping i s w e l l d e f i n e d s i n c e t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of e l e m e n t s of
Gk

and

Gn

by

rak tl

and

t + rb

, respectively,
then

is

unique.

I n particular, if
b =

rlb = t 2+ r 2 b

rl
Gk-l

r2

would imply t h a t

r2-rl c o n t r a r y t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of

-( t l - t 2 )
G"

i s an element of

Zvidently,

jd i s an

a l g e b r a i c isomorphism. s e r v i n g , suppose t h a t c a s e i f and o n l y i f

To s e e t h a t

jd i s a l s o o r d e r pret2 + r2ak

tl

rlak

<

This is t h e

If

r 2 = rl

t h e r e i s n o t h i n g t o prove f o r i n t h a t c a s e t2

b ( t l ) = tl

, ,d(t2) :=

If

r2 # rl

t h e n we may suppose

- 209 -

A. Robinson

w i t h o u t l o s s of g e n e r a l i t y t h a t and o n l y i f

r 1 < r2

.
b

Then 4.8 h o l d s i f

But t h e n , a c c o r d i n g t o o u r assumption on

, ,

and t h i s i n t u r n i m p l i e s T h i s shows t h a t isomorphic t o on jd(Gk)

tl

rlb

<

t2 + r2b
0"

as r e q u i r e d .

i s a subgroup o f

which i s o r d e r

Gk;k-l

.
C"

Gk by a mapping which r e d u c e s t o t h e i d e n t i t y It f o l l o w s t h a t Y h o l d s i n jd(Gk) and hence

also i n

.
K"
be t h e union of t h o f o l l o w i n g s a t s of
Dk,l (i) K ; ( i i ) t h e diagrax

Now l e t sentences

--

of

Gk-l

; (iii)
ak

t h e s e t of s e n t e n c e s or ak

Q(b,t)
b

or

Q(t,b)

according a s

<t

>t ,

where

i s a n i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t which d i d
Then e v e r y mode:
G '

n o t occur p r e v i o u s l y .

of

K~

has j u s t
G"

t h e p r o p e r t i e s c o n s i d e r e d above, and s o T h i s shotrs t h a t

holds i n

i s a consequence o f

K~

and hence, t h a t

i s a consequence of

,-

Dkel

t o g e t h e r with a sentence

where t h e

ti

a r e e l e m e n t s of

GkSl

and where we i n c l u d e t h e o r no Q(b,ti) b

p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e r e a r e no

Q(ti,b)
K b DkWl

Z(b) 3 Y
neither i n

i s a consnquence of
K Dk,l
30"

Thus

Since

occurs

in
Dk,l

we conclude ;FA;
: ,

z(*y)~(;~)]
r-.c
1

-. >

i s a consequence of

W a r e gc:.rr e

:ht

( . I y ) z ( ~ )h o l d s i n e x t e n s i o n of
Gk,l

Gk,l

210 -

A. Robinson

Indeed, since

Z(ak)

holds i n an

we have ti = t t o =:

t - = n a x ti < min

(4 + f ) and

l<iL j

j+l<i<l for

But t h e n so

Z(to)

holds i n
Ckel

Gk-l

( ~ Y ) Z ( Yh o l d s i n ) ti

If t h e f i r s t o r t h e second

of t h e two groups o f to = max ( 2 nax in all cases,

i s empty, we choos? i n s t e a d
or to = n i n ( 2 min
Gk-l
j+l_< j 9

l<iL j

ti

, 0) ,

ti

, 0)
Gk,l

mus

( ~ Y ) Z ( ~ olds i n h)
K D

Since

s a t i s f i e s also

we conclude t h a t

holds already

in

Gk,l

T h i s c o n t r a d i c t i o n p r o v e s 4.5. Theorem.
K

4.10.

i s complete.

I n o r d e r t o prove 3.10, we o n l y need observe t h a t

K

possesses a prine nodel, i.e.

t h e o r d e r e d a d d i t i v e group

of r a t i o n a l numbers. In spite o f t h e r e l a t i v e s i m p l f c i t y o f t h 9 example

c o n s i d e r e d above, many f e a t u r e s o f t h e argument c a r r y over t o t h e more complicated s i t u a t i o n s ' c o n s i d e r e d e l s a v h e r e .

5.

A t e s t f o r elenentary equivalence.

I: "

s h a l l now

d e r i v e a t e s t f o r elementary e q u i v a l e n c e which, i n c e r t a i n c a s e s , can be used i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h t h e c o m p l e t e n s s s o f a s e t of sentences

K

However, o u r p r i n c i p a l a p p l i c a t i o n of i t w i l l A and Kochen ( s e c t i o n s 7-12, below). x

concern t h e theorem of

The p r e s e n t s e c t i o n i s based on R. ~ r a i s s 6 ' sapproach t o

Model Theory ( r e f . 4). 2 )

2,

I understand t h a t i n a r e c e n t d i s s e r t a t i o n by N. Renda

some o f ~r&sse/'s o t i o n s and r e s u l t s a r e extended t o i n f i n i t a r y n

5.1. Theorem. Let

211

and
M2

A. Robinson

M1

be two s t r u c t u r e s

f o r which t h e r e e x i s t s a s e t -11- isomorphic mappings from of s u b s t r u c t u r e s of Y 1 i n t o substructures of

PI2

which s a t i s -

f i e s t h e following conditions

5.2.
5.3.

-A- i s n o t empty.
If

h E j\ and
Xt E

al

i s any i n d i v i d u a l of

M1

then
h

t h e r e e x i s t s a mapping

which is a n e x t e n s i o n of

such t h a t

al
If

i s i n c l u d e d i n t h e domain o f
X E -/\

h '

.
1tl2
X

5.4.
such t h a t

and

a2 i s any i n d i v i d u a l of
X' E

t h e n t h e r e e x i s t s a mapping a2 Then

which i s an e x t e n s i o n of
X?

i s i n c l u d e d i n t h e r a n g e of
Il G and

M2

a r e elementarily equivalent i n a

v o c a b u l a r y which i n c l u d e s symbols f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s of and

M2 o n l y (and hence, d o e s n o t i n c l u d e any i n d i v i d u a l conct a n i s ) .

They a r e e l e m e n t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t a l s o i n a vocabulary which ~ n c l u d e s i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s provided t h a t f o r any which i s denoted by a n i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t and f o r any individual a al in

i n t h e vocabulary

h E - which i n c l u d e s " !
h(al) in
M2

al

i n its domain, t h e a

a l s o i s denoted by

Proof.

W c o n s i d e r first t h e c a s e t h a t no i n d i v i d u a l e

c o n s t a n t s a r e p r e k e n t i n t h e v o c a b u l a r y under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Let then

X

be a s e n t e n c e which d o e s n o t c o n t a i n any i n d i v i d u a l

c o n s t a n t s and which h o l d s i n
X

holds also i n

PI2

Then we have t o show t h a t

W may suppose, w i t h o u t l o s s of e

generility, that

X i s i n prenex normal form, a s e x e m p l i f i e d

A. Robinson

The Skolem form of 5.5 i s

W s h a l l assume, f o r s i m p l i c i t y , t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a i s of e
M 1

and

M2

d e n o t e themselves.

Then t h e r e e x i s t f u n c t i o n s

#1 ( X1'X2 , 4 :1 ( X1'X 2 ) 2 11, 1 1

individuals

. ~ ~ 1 ( ~ 1 , ~ 2 , Z,1 )such t h a t f o r a l l PIl

1 1 a 1 a 2 , cl i n l,

holds i n

M1
Let

.
ho
f

be any element of

.-A- , w i t h domain D ' X ~

Applying c o n d i t i o n 5.4 t w i c e , we nay determine 2 2 f o r any g i v e n p a i r of i n d i v i d u a l s i n N2, al and a 2 , a and r a n g e

Lo

mapping X E A which i s a n e x t e n s i o n of ho such t h a t 1 2 2 ,al, a 2 E ; and vre may t h e n a p p l y 5.3 i n orcier t o

d%

determine a n e x t e n s i o n h2 of '1 2 ? dll(%-1( a2 ) , h i ( a 2 )) E D h 2 l i n a d d i t i o n a n inc1ividu.al extension

L ,
C :

hl,

h2 E

-A. ,

such t h z t

Furthermore, i f we a r e g i v e n in
M2

of

h2 of

in

t h e n vre may f i n d a n 2 such t h a t al E d!k3 ; and

a n ext,ensior! -1 that

;Li,
2

h3 which a i s o belongs t o - A - suqh 1 <2 -I( 2 -1 2 ( a 2 ) , p7 cl) and .c/s>l(Al ( a l ) , y l ( a : )

h4

,Aj1(c:

are i n the dmain

D ' X ~ of

Observe t h a t

-1 i nl ( a 2)

2 = h -1( a1 ) 2 .

-1 7 = S (a;)

- h -1( a 2 ) - 4 i

i =1, 2 .

W novr i n t r o d u c e f u n c t i o n s e

y22(~1h , x 2 , zl) w i t

h 2 ( x 1 , x 2 ) , 2 f ; 2 ( ~ , - , x 2 ,zl)

a r g u n c n t s r a n g i n g over

M2

by

and we claim t h a t for in

jd12,T2,%2t u t e Skolem f u n c t i o n s consti

crX
M2

in

M2

, i.e.

t h a t , f o r arbitrary individuals

2 2 2 al,a2,c1

,
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ~ ( a ~ , a ~ , # ~ ~ c( :a, ~ , a , a 2~ c l ) , x 2 ( a f , a$,c:)) , ~ ~ ( ~ ) ,

5.9.
holds i n Xi

M2

Taking i n t o account 5.8. and t h e f a c t t h a t Xi,l,

i s a n e x t e n s i o n of

i = 2,3,4,

we may r e v t r i t e 5.9 a s

Putting

a :

2 a = hi1 ( a l ) , :

-1 2 1 -1 l = h4 ( a2 ) ,c1 = h4 ( c 2 ) ,

we o b t a i n

i n p l a c e of 5.10,

But t h e atomic formulae i n 5.11 a r e j u s t t h e t r a n s f o r m s by

hL

- 214

A. Robinson

o f t h e atomic forrfllae i n 5.7, and both 5.11 and 5.7 a r e f r e e of q u a n t i f i e r s . holds i n Thus t h e f a c t t h a t a n atomic formula of 5.11

M2

i f and o n l y if t h e corresponding atomic formula

o f 5.7 h o l d s i n holds i n
M1

E 5

shows t h a t 5.11 h o l d s i n

M2 j u s t a s 5.7

T h i s proves 5.1 f o r v o c a b u l a r i e s which do n o t It i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o v e r i f y includes individual satisfy the auxiliary

include individual constants.

t h a t t h e above method works even if X c o n s t a n t s , provided t h e elements o f c o n d i t i o n s t a t e d i n t h e theorem.

T h i s c a s e may a r i s e , i n

p a r t i c u l a r , if t h e domains of i n d i v i d u a l s of have a non-empty I n t e r s e c t i o n ,

A,

and &I2 1 and i f t h e v o c a b u l a r y

c o n t a i n s i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s d e n o t i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of ( t h e correspondence b e i n g t h e same f o r as for

M2).

A . In

t h i s c a s e , t h e c o n d i t i o n of 5.1 r e q u i r e s simply t h a t th,e e l e m e n t s o f -iL s h o u l d l e a v e t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of Ma) = a for

a E A,

A .

unchanged,

As a first a p p l i c a t i o n o f 5.1, we prove

j.12.

Theorem.

Let

M1

and

M2

b e two a l g e b r a i c a l l y

c l o s e d f i e l d s of t h e same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

Then

PIl

and

Id2 a r e elementaril-y e q u i v a l e n t i n a vocabulary trhich c o n s i s t s of t h e r e l a t i o n symbols E ( x , y ) , S ( x , y , z ) , P ( x , y , z ) - ( f o r x = y ,

x -k y = z, xy = z , r e s p e c t i v e l y ) .

Proof.

A l l f i e l d s of t h e kind d e s c r i b e d i n t h e Hence, u s i n g t h e upward LUtrenheim-Skolem 1 5 and

t t

theorem a r e i n f i n i t e .

theorem 3.8, tre may f i n d uncountable f i e l d s a r e elementary e x t e n s i o n s of

Nl

E2

which Since

and

F12

respectively.

M 1
t a r i l y equivalent t o
W2
1

215

Tl
?

A. Robinson

i s elementarily equivalent t o

and

M2,

is elenenE , S,

i n t h e v o c a b u l a r y of

and

it s u f f i c e s t o shot: t h a t

M;

and

14;

a r e elementarily
1

equivalent.
1

For t h i s purpose we i n t r o d u c e - a s t h e - o f . - et I s Ell Then -A s n o t empty s i n c e t h e prime f i e l d s o f i a r e isoxorphic. F1

1

isomorphic mappings of f i n i t e o r c o u n t a b l e subf iel.ds of into &I2

.
M2
1

: M

and

Thus, c o n d i t i o n 5.2 h o l d s and

i n o r d e r t o a p p l y 5.1, and 5.4. Let then

w o n l y have t o v e r i f y c o n d i t i o n s 5.3 e
be a f i n i t e o r c o u n t a b l e s u b f i e l d of F 1 onto a
M1
1 1

M ;
If
and

and l e t F2

h
of

be a n isomorphic mapping from

la2

subfield

Also, l e t

al

be any element o f

al E F1
al

t h e r e i s n o t h i n g t o prove. F 1

If

al E 11 4

- Fl

i s transcendental over

t h e n we choose a n F2

element Such a n

a2 E M2
a2

F2

which i s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l o v e r F2

.
onto

exists since

i s c o u n t a b l e , and s o i t s

algebraic closure i s countable, but W now d e f i n e a n isomorphic mapping e

F2 ( a 2 )
.

M ;
h1

i s not countable.
from Fl(al) on F 1

by s t i p u l a t i n g t h a t
?

while

h (al) = a2

h1 r e d u c e s t o

T h i s c o n f i r m s 5.3 f o r t h e c a s e t h a t F 1

al
F1

is t r a n s c e n d e n t a l o v e r p l ( x ) E F1 [x] r o o t s i n c l u d e al p 2 ( x ) E F2[x] let

If

al

i s a l g e b r a i c over

be t h e monic i r r e d u c i b l e polynomial vinoss

and l e t

a2

be a r o o t o f t h e polynomial pl(x) under Fl(al) al on

h, a2 g M2
?

which i s t h e image of

- F2 .

Then t h e r e i s a c a n o n i c a l isomorphisn from which i s a n e x t e n s i o n of h and which ma;,s

?

onto a2

F (a ) 1 2 This

is t h e required

i n t h i s case.

I n o r d e r t o v e r i f y 5.4 we o n l y have t o i n t e r c h a n g e

t h e r u l e s of

216

4
t

A. Robinson

MI

and

M2
lJ2
1

Thus, 5.1 a p p l i e s ,

is elenien-

t a r i l y equivalent t o to
M2

and s o

&Tl

is elementarily equivalent

W may r e f o r m u l a t e t h i s r e s u l t a s f d l o w s e 5.13. Theorem. Let

K

be a s e t of axioms ( s e n t e n c s s )

f o r t h e n o t i o n o f a n a l g e b r a i c a l l y c l o s e d f i e l d of s p e c i f i e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f o r m u l a t e d i n t h e 1,ovrer P r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s i n t e r m s of t h e r e l a t i o n synibols E(x,Y)

, S ( x , ~ , z ),

P(x,y,z)

.
K

The1

i s complete.

It i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o d e t a . i l s e t s of s e n t e n c e s
a s mentioned i n 5.13.

There a r e however v a r i o u s o t h a r p r o o f s

of t h e theorem, some s i m p l e r t h a n t h e one g i v e n above, which was chosen a s a f i r s t i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of

Thee-rem 5.1.
6.
Let
R

Mon-standard A n a l y s i s and H i ~ h e rOrder Languages.

%

be t h e f i e l d of r e a l numbers and l e t
19

be t h e s e t

a l l s e n t e n c e s ~r!-~icho l d i n h

i n a vocabulary which c o n s i s t s

of i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t s t o d e n o t e r e l a t i o n symbols t o d e n o t e a l l r e a l numbers,
41

& r e a l numbers and o f

There e x i s t p r o p e r e x t e n s i o n s

n-plane r e l a t i o n s FJetxeen

n = 1 , 2 , 3,
K

...
.

-R
K
x

of

which s a t i s f y

T h i s can be s e e n by adding t o Q(x,y) stands f o r

t h e s e t of s e n t e n c e s

{ Q ( a ; . , b ) j :;/here

<

y , a,

r a n g e s o v e r t h e (ind5.vidual c o n s t a n t s d e n o t i n g )
b

r e a l numbers and

i s an a d d i t i o n a l i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t .

A s i n t h e proof of Theoren 3.8 (from trhi.ch o u r p r e s e n t a s s e r t i o n

can i n f a c t be deduced i r m e d i a t e l y ) we s e e t h a t
K u lQ(a,,b) ] = J

i s c o n s i s t e r i t by v e r i f y i n g t h a t any f i n i t e

; ! l ~-

s u b s e t of model of
R

*R o f J i s isomorphic , and we may assume t h a t

R
d

can be i::i;-.rpreted

s o a s t o hold i n
4 ,

A. RoSlnson Ii Any

t o an elementary e x t e n s i o n
*R 3 R

Then

must

bl

a p r o p e r e x t e n s i o n of denoted by b

s i n c e i t i n c l u d e s an i n d i v i d u a l ,

which i s d i f f e r e n t from a l 1 , t h e r e a l nm..bers R)

( i n d i v i d u a l s of denoted by b

i s non-archimedean s i n c e t h e element

i s g r e a t e r t h a n a l l r e a l numbers o r , a l t e r n a t L v e l y ,
R

because any o r d e r e d f i e l d which i s a p r o p e r e x t e n s i o n of be non-archimedean.

must

There e x i s t s , by now, an e x t e n s i v e l i t e r a t u r e vrhich shows t h a t a s t r u c t u r e

*
. F

a s i n t r o d u c e d above can be used

i n o r d e r t o b a s e t h e D i f f e r e n t i a l and I n t e ~ r n lC a l c u l u s on i n f i n i t e l y l a r g e and i n f i n i t e l y s m a l l ( i n f i n i t e s i m a l ) n u ~ b e r s a s envisaged n e a r l y t h r e e hundred y e a r s ago by s e v e r a l mathematicians, among whom L e i b n i a d e s o r v e s s p e c i a l mention. But a l t h o u g h t h i s framework i s a d e q u a t e f o r elementary A n a l y s i s
it t u r n s o u t t h a t f o r o t h e r purposes it h a s t o be s t r e n g t h e n e d

i n several respects.

One of t h e s e i s t h e us" of a h i g h e r o r d a r

language o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y , o f a s e t t h e o r e t i c a l framevrork. Here we s h a l l be c o n t e n t w i t h a mere s k e t c h of t h e new p o i n t s i n t r o d u c e d i n t h i s way, and we l e a v e it t o t h e r e a d e r t o cons u l t t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t e c h n i c a l d e t a i l s ( r e f . 1 8 ) .

A h i g h e r o r d e r language of o r d e r

'' 2

differs fron

t h e language of t h e Lower P r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s i n i n c l u d i n g symbols, c o n s t a n t o r v a r i a b l e , a l s o f o r r e l a t i o n s o f a r b i t r a r y t y p e ( s e t s of s o t s , s e t s of r e l a t i o n s , relations bctvleen r e l a t i o n s , e t c . ) a s vie11 a s q u a n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t t o

218 -

A. Robinson

v a r i a b l e s which correspond t o r e l a t i o n s of a r b i t r a r y type. example, t h e s e n t e n c e "For every numbers g r e a t e r t h a n

For

t h e r e e x i s t s t h e s e t of

which cannot be e x p r e s s e d w i t h i n

t h e Lower P r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s , p o s s e s s e s an o b v i o u s f o r m a l i z a t i o n i n t h e extended language c o n s i d e r e d here.

It i s customary,

but n o t e s s e n t i a l , t o i n t r o d u c e c e r t a i n t y p e r e s t r i c t i o n s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e e n t i t i e s p e r n i t t e d f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n such a t h e o r y , e.g., t o r u l e o u t s e t s which c o n t a i n b o t h i n d i v i d u a l s

and s e t s of i n d i v i d u a l s o r , a t l e a s t , t o r u l e o u t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t one s e t both c o n t a i n a n o t h e r s e t and be c o n t a i n e d i n i t , and t o r e g a r d s t a t e m e n t s which a f f i r m such s i t u a t i o n s n o t merely as f a l s e b u t a c t u a l l y a s meaningless.

By c o n t r a s t , i n

Axiomatic S e t Theory, t h e former p o s s i b i l i t y i s n o t r u l e d o u t

a t a l l , w h i l e t h e l a t t e r cannot a r i s e by v i r t u e of t h e axiom
o f r e g u l a r i t y , b u t t h i s nakes s t a t e m e n t s t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t a s e t i s contained i n a n o t h e r s e t b u t a l s o c o n t a i n s i t , merely f a l s e b u t n o t meaningless. Even if Type Theory i s used, d i s t i n g u i s h i n g s t r i c t l y between e n t i t i e s o f d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s , we may s t i l l r e g a r d t h e h i g h e r o r d e r e n t i t i e s , such a s s e t s , o r r e l a t i o n s , o r s e t s

of r e l a t i o n s a s o b j e c t s vL~ichb e a r c e r t a i n r e l a t i o n s , such as
t h e r e l a t i o n of conta-imnment, t o o t h e r o b j e c t s . From t h i s p o i n t o f view i t i s still. p o s s i b l e t o e s t a b l i s h a c o u n t e r p a r t o f Theorem 3.5 ( t h e compactness theorem) provided wd understand t h e n o t i o n of a model of a s e n t e n c e o r s e t of s e n t e n c e s " i n Henkin' sense.ll That i s t o s a y , when i n t e r p r e t i n g s e n t e n c e s of t h e
,

extended formal languagc i n a s t r u c t u r e M

references t o

- 219

A. Robinson

s u b s e t s of

r e l a t i o n s on

1 1 .

s e t s of r e l a t i o n s on

!-I

e t c . , a r e t o be i n t s r p r e t e d a s r e f e r r i n g n e t t o e t c . of internal. on
M

subsets,

, but

o n l y t o a s u b c l a s s of t h e s e , t o be c a l l e d

S i m i l a r l y , an a s s e r t i o n "there e x i s t s a r e l a t i o n

l1

i s t o be i n t e r p r e t e d a s
M

" t h e r e e x i s t s an i ~ t z r n a l ?hat

r e l a t i o n on

, etc.

f o r o t h e r e n t i t i e s o f h i g h e r type."

m a t t e r s , i n t h e first p l a c e i s n o t how t o s i n g l e o u t t h e s e i n t e r n a l e n t i t i e s , b u t t h e f a c t t h a t such a d i s t i n c t i o n i s p o s s i b l e and l e a d s a g a i n t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i f e v e r y f i n i t e s u b s e t of a s e t of s e n t e n c e s

p o s s e s s e s a model t h e n

i t s s l f possesses

a model.
Thus, l e t
R

be t h e f i e l d of r e a l numbers, as
R

b e f o r e , b u t l e t u s novr r e g a r d

a s a "higher order s t r u c t u r e n

t h a t i s t o s a y l e t u s t a k e i n t o account s e t s of r e l a t i o n s on r e l a t i o n s between r e l a t i o n s on etc. Let

K R

s e t s of s e t s of r e l a t i o n s ,

be t h e s e t o f a l l s e n t e n c e s f o r m u l a t e d i n t h e

h i g h e r o r d e r language i c t r o d u c e d above and i n c l u d i n g symbols f o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l s of r e l a t i o n s t h a t e x i s t on

R
R

as w e l l . a s f o r a l l h i g h e r o r d e r

Then t h e argument f o r m u l a t e d

p r e v i o u s l y f o r t h e Lor.:er F r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s shows a g a i n t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a p r o p e r e,xtension of Let

N

" i n Henkin's sense."

*R

*R

of

which i s a model

i s a non-archinedean f i e l d .
R

be t h e s e t o f natu.ra1 numbers r e g a r d e d a s a s u b s e t o f

d e t e r m i n e s a one p l a c e r b l a t i o n , t o be denoted w i t h o u t f e a r N(x) such t h a t M(a) Let N(a)

4 ,

o f c o n f u s i o n by o n l y if a individuals

holds i n
-N

R
41

i f and

i s a n a t u r a l number.
a of
1 4 . .

be t h e s e t of holds i n
*R

X such t h a t

Then
4 ,

220 Q

A. Robinson

-N 3 N

The p r o p o r t i e s of

with respect t o addition

and n u l t i p l i c a t i o n and any o t h e r r e l a t i o n o r o p e r a t i o n on t h e n a t u r ~ nwnbers a r e e x a c t l y t h e same a s t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f c o r r e c t r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s i n explained.

with t h e as
R

"M

S i m i l a r l y , a l l o t h e r s e t s and r e l a t i o n s i n

extensions t o

.. ,
-R

have
41

The e n t i t i e s ( s e t s , r e l a t i o n s , e t c . ) of
4-

*R
is

which a r e o b t a i n e d i n t h i s yay a r e c a l l e d s t a n d a r d . a standard subset of e l e m e n t s of e l e m e n t s of

Q

Thus, -N taken a s

The r e a l numbers o f

R
* N

a l s o a r e called standard
~ R

*
I

Within

*N ,
and

the

M are, t h e s t a n d a r d o r f i n i t e n a t u r a l

numbers w h i l e t h e e l e m e n t s of numbers.

*N -

are the infinite natural a E M

J ,

It i s n o t d i f f i c u l t t o show t h a t i f
then a
i s smaller than

b E *N

The s e t

-I 'f

cannot b e i n t e r n a l .

F o r i t i s a p r o p e r t y cf

(which i s
? 4. .

e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e axiom of complete i n d u c t i o n ) t h a t e v e r y nonempty s u b s e t of n o t empty.

J .

For

N * * .

p o s s e s s e s a s m a l l e s t element.
R

M - PJ
,

is
there

i s non-archimedean, and, as i n
,. # 1-

R
J.

,
4 .

e x i s t s for every element of

il

a g r e a t e r elemant of
a E *'N
But a

-'.M

N'

d o e s n o t have a s m a l l e s t element f o r i f a $ 0

-N
to

But

then

so

1 exists.
and
* 3 .

1 n u s t be i n f i n i t e ,

otherwise assumption.

- 1 E PJ
r: ,

a = (a-1)
N

+ 1E M

, contrary

Ye conclude t h a t /

is n o t a n i n t e r n a l s e t o r ,

a s we s h a l l a l s o s a y i n t h i s c a s e ! L ' follows t h a t

is e x t e r n ? .

It

r e g a r d c d a s a s u b s e t of *R

is external

a s well.

By c o n t r a s t , l e t
Then t h e s e t
A = {x
J 1 . .

~i

be any i n f i n i t e n a t u r a l nu-.~ber.

>

CL-

i s interxal..

Fcr c o n s l d e r

221-

A. Robinson

t h e s t a t e m e n t "For e v e r y n a t u r a l number

there exists a set y

which c o n t a i n s j u s t t h e n a t u r a l nunlbers g r e a t e r t h a n T h i s statement i s t r u e i n t e n c e of

K R

11

and can be f o r m a l i z e d a s a sen-

Accordingly i t can be r e i n t e r p r e t e d as a t r u e

s t a t e m e n t about t h e e x i s t e n c e of
A
A

*R ,
A

and i n t h a t s t r u c t u r e it a s s c r t s p r e c i s e l y
A

, i.e.

i s an i n t e r n a l s e t .
R B

Nevertheless,
* c -N

* = B

i s not a standard s e t .
where
B

For suppose on t h e c o n t r a r y t h a t

i s a s t a n d a r d s u b s e t of

Since

we t h e n have

B C N

and s i n c e

# 6,

#d ,
R

both of and

t h e s e b e i n g a s s e r t i o n s r d ~ i c hmust h o l d e q u a l l y . i n Thus,
B

*R

c o n t a i n s a s m a l l e s t elernent, b But t h e n
b

n a t u r a l number. since
A

* E B

, which

i s a standard

=A

and t h i s i s i m p o s s i b l e Thus

conta5.ns o n l y i n f i n i t e n a t u r a l nunbers.

is

i n t e r n a l hut not standard. Recall t h a t

K
4.

-*R

i s o b t a i n e d from
where

by a d d i n g t o stands f o r

a s e t of s e n t e n c e s

{ & ( a L, b ) ]

Q(x,y)

x of

<y ,
R)

a,, r a n g e s o v e r t h e r e a l numbers ( t h e i n d i v i d u a l s and b i s an a d d i t i o n a l i n d i v i d u a l c o n s t a n t . The

follovring n o t i o n s a r e i n t r c d u c e d i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e i n o r d e r t o extend t h i s procedure a l s o t o more g a n e r a l n a t h e n a t i c a l t h e o r i e s . Hov-

ever, f o r c e r t a i n purposss they a r e useful a l s o i n Analysis. Let

be a m a t h e n a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e which i n c l u d e s t h e

n a t u r a l numbers, where we t a k e i n t o a c c c u n t a l s o t h e h i g h e r o r d e r r e l a t i o n s on which h o l d i n in

1 4
14

T 1 .

and l e t

be t h e s e t of s e n t e n c e s R ( x , y ) of any t y p e

a s abcve.

A relation

i s c a l l e u c o n c u r r e n t if it s a t i s f i e s t h e follovri.ng

- 222 -

A. Robinson

condition.

For any e l e n e n t s

al,
R

..., a,,
,D
1

1 of t h e

domain o f t h e f i r s t argument of a II such t h a t

1 4 . .

P,(al,b),

..., R ( a n , b )

there exists
i.i

a l l hold i n

The

structure

M 3 M i s c a l l e d a n enlargement of I i f ( i ) it T
K

i s a model of
in R(aD, bR)

and ( i i ) , f o r any c o n c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n ( c a l l e d a bgund f o r R)

: $
1

R(x,y)

I t h e r e e x i s t s a bR 4
holds i n
M

such t h a t

for a l l

a, E D R

The e x i s t e n c e of

enlargements can a g a i n be e s t a b l i s h e d by means o f t h e compactness theorem, i . e . {R(ad,bR)]

it can be ~ h o i ~ h a t any f i n i t e s e t of s e n t e n c e s tn

, with

c o n c u r r e n t and, p o s s i b l y v a r y i n g from
K

one s e n t e n c e t o t h a o t h c r , i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h can be i n t e r p r e t e d i n
R

f o r it

.
IIonevar, we

I n any p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n of a n enl-argenent on2

i s l i k e l y t o u s e o n l y a few c o n c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s .

may a s w e l l c a r r y o u t our developments without any l i m i t a t i o a s t o t h e i r number. Let [ a o ,al,aZ,

standard e n t i t i e s i n
*

*,

..., an, ...]

..I . ,
-* a, - b,
and l e t
* ,
1-

be a sequence of
K

lji

with subscripts i n

Then t h e r e
J-

e x i s t s a n i n t e r n a l sequ.ence i n into

M (i. a mapping f r o a e.
an for finite f o r some n bn

'P) .I

which ta!:es an

the values

.
ifi

Indeed,
?"I

since the

a r e standard, n

for all finite

Let

s = [bn]
bn

be t h e soquence i n
C J,
J.

which c o n s i s t s o f t h e s s ponding sequence ir,

1 4.

,
Then

s be t h e c o r r e s J.
4 .

11

.
n

s = {l'bo,"bl,

..., "bn, ...]

*
1 .

s o t h a t f o r any f i n i t e

is j u s t

an

t h e corresponding e l e n c n t of

Now l e t of
-)r

223

A . Robinson

[ao,al,aZ,

+M

defined f o r

n E Pi
1 4 . ,

.
,

...!
n E -N '
C

be a sequence of e n t i t i e s

Then i t does

not fo1lo:r

From t h ?

d e f i n i t i o n of a n e n l a r ~ e n s n tt h a t t h e r e e x i s t s an j n t e r n a l sequence

s = isn}
n

in

for all finite

such t h a t

sn -- a n

If a g i v e n enlargement p o s s e s s e s t h i s

p r o p e r t y t h e n vre s i l a l l c a l l i t s e q u e n t i a l l v conpr~hx;~s5.ve.

I have .shorn elsey.here ( r e f . 13) t h a t vre ,my c o n s t r u c t a n *' -,.

enlargement

of any g i v e n

FI a s an u l t r a p o w e r and t h a t
W proceed t o si:etc:? e

t h e r e s u l t i s sequent?all.y comprehensive. how t h i s can be done.

Referring t o t h e construction of an ultrapower i n s e c t i o n 3 . , rue first have t o e x p l a i n how it can be a d a p t e d t o h i g h e r o r d e r s t r u c t ~ v d s . The r e l a t i o n s of t h e u l t r a p o w e r a r e now o b t a i n e d a s f o l l o x s . corresponding copies
D

For a g i v e n i n d e x s e t of a g i v e n s t r u c t u r e

I =
1 7 .

{j..]

and a n u l t r a f i l t e r

on

let

p(x)
?I .

be any f u n c t i o n from
3) E

i n t o a s e t of

n-ary r e l a t i o n s s o t'rlat f o r each

i s a r e l a t i o n on
f u n c t i o n s from

Let

al(x),

..., a n ( x )

, p(:;) = RJ; (xl,

..., x n )
..., x n )
by

be, s i m i l a r l y ,

i n t o s e t s of individuals o r r e l a t i o n s (of

a p p r o p r i a t e t y p e ) v ~ h i c hmay a p p e a r a s arguments of W then define a r e l a t i o n e postulating t h a t

R

above i f and o n l y i f t h e s e t

h o l d s between

i n t h e ulirapower al(x),

2 ..](xl, I

= 1.i /D

..., a,(x)

as

belongs t o t h e u l t r a f i l t e r

D
hi

In particular, i f

Ro(xl,

is an

n-place r e l a t i o n i n

and we put

,o(:.,) = Ro(xi,

..., x n )

..., X n )

for a l l Y

, then

power under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Ve now d e f i n e t h e i n d e x s e t I more p a r t i c u l a r l y l

i s t h e e x t e n s i o n of

Ro

t o the ultra-

a s t h e s e t of a l l f u n c t i o n s

g(R)
D R
t

which a r e d e f i n e d on
14

t h e c l a s s of c o n c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n s i n each R, g(R)

such t h a t f o r

is a subset of

.
h

W introduce a e

p a r t i a l ordering i n in

I by p u t t i n g

4g

for

and

if and o n l y if h ( R )

g(R)

f o r a l l concurrent in

W a l s o define an operation e k(R) = h ( R )

h u g =k

by

g(R)

f o r a l l concurrent

il
I

A s u i t a b l e u l t r a f i l t e r i s novr determined on

as follows.

For e v e r y

g E I g E d,
0

dg i s n o t empty s i n c e dg that dh = dg

define

d, = [ h C I, g-3 h )
0

Also, f o r any

and

,
Let

Let

Do

be t h e s e t of a l l

A 3 dg

f o r some
8

g E I

A C I

such

Then

go

is a f i l t e r .

Dl

b e any u l t r a f i l t e r which i s a n e x t e n s i o n o f

Do
8

Then

t h e ultrapower hold i n
bl

: = M'/D~ E

s a t i s f i e s a l l s e n t e n c e s which

i n Henkinqs s e n s e a s explained e a r l i e r .

mgy

s t i l l be r e g a r d e d a s a n e x t e n s i o n o f
i n d i v i d u a l s o r r e l a t i o n s of on

M by i d e n t i f y i n g t h e
functions a s mentioned above.

, e.g.

P ( V ) = R0(x1,

..., xn)
Define

with t h e

Now l e t

R(x,y) be any c o n c u r r e n t r e l a t i o n on 14

W wish t o show t h a t t h e corresponding r e l a t i o n i n e p o s s e s s e s a bound i n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g way.

*1.1

.
I !

*M

bR = f ( x )

for all

Given

x = g = g(R) E I

choose a

- 225 -

A. Robinson

suitable

f (y) = b

so t h a t

R(a,b)

holds i n g(R)

I4

for a l l
R

a E g(R)

This i s possible since

i s f i n i t e and

is

concurrent. I n order t o see t h a t bR i s a bound f o r

R

be any element of

resented i n

*PI

D'R

in

let

A s we know,

i s rep-

by t h e c o n s t a n t f u n c t i o n > o a ( x ) = a

.
M] BT

Thus

we have t o show o n l y t h a t t h e s e t filter

S belongs t o t h e u l t r a -

Dl

where

S = Ig I I R ( a , f ( g ) )
f

holds i n holds i n

But, by t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f
if

a E g(R)

R(a,f(y))

Hence

S 3 T = f g I la 6 g(R)j

t o show o n l y t h a t d e f i n e d by since

T 6 Dl

and we have h

But x = R

T = dh

where

is
x + R ,

h(x) = {a]

for

and

h(x) = @ f o r

a F g ( R ) if and o n l y if h ( x ) - : g ( x ) Having t h u s shown t h a t

X X

Thus, T E Do,

T E Dl

P i s a n enlargement o f I
is s e q u e n t i a l l y compreC

we p r o ~ e e dt o v e r i f y t h a t Let {an] n E ! F

hensive.

defined f o r over

be a sequence of e n t i t i e s cf Then an = a ( a , n )
Id1

-14

,
n

where x
X

ranges and

and

a(x,n) ,belongs t o

f o r each
X

To d e f i n e a s u i t a b l e i n t e r n a l sequence i n d e f i n e a two p l a c e r s l a t i o n

14 means t o

D>

is

*N

p(x)

in

?.Il

whose donain n E I c "N

and which i s such t h a t f o r any n an6

h o l d s between

sn if and o n l y i f

sn - an

,
For so

t h i s purpose we choose that

Ry ( x , y )

p(b) = R U ( x , y )

f o r any b E I

holds i n

1.l i f and only i f

( s t a n d a r d ) n a t u r a l n u ~ i o e rand p ( x ) = R (x,y)

y= a ( ~ , n )

x is a
Then
C

d e f i n s s a f u n c t i o n with domain

* .

in

*M

226-

A. Robinson

For t h e s e t

[ , J ~ R ~ ( X , mplies i~ )

x E M)

coincides with

and h e n c e , belongs t o

, and

so does t h e s e t n E N].

[~!IR,,(X,~)~
Norr l e t x

determines

uniquel-y f o r any g i v e n an(u) = n

be

t h e constant function [ R (n, a n ) )

1 and s o o u r a s s e r t i o n i s proved,
6.1.
ment N
* ,
T

bslongs t o

. .

Thsn we have t o show t h a t But t h i . s i s a g a i n t h e s e t

*M

i s s e q u e n t i a l l y comprehensive.

Theoren.

Let

*
T~

be t h e s e t o f f i n i t e and i n -

f i n i t e n a t u r a l numbers i n a s e q u e n t i a l l y comprehensive e n l a r g e -

M o f a s t r u c t u r e 1.1 which c o n t a i n s t h e n a t u r a l numbers,

*N

Then t h e s e t of i n f i n i t e n a t u r a l numbers,

- N , cannot

be c o i n i t i a l with a f i n i t e o r c o u n t a b l e s e t . hoof. Let

A = >I
1 4 . .

cannot b e c o i n i t i a l

w i t h a f i n i t e s e t f o r t h i s '*:ouid i m p l y , wrongly, t h e e x i s t e n c e of a s m a l l e s t i n f i n i t e n a t u r a l n m b e r . Suppose t h e n t h a t be a one-$0-one

*

A map~f~g

i s i n f i n i t e and c o u n t a b l e and l e t
from N onto

[an]

A s we have j u s t shown, t h e r e e x i s t s an

i n t e r n a l sequence

Isn] i n
n

*
1 .

14

w i t h domain

*N

such t h a t

sn - an f o r a l l f i n i t e -

Consider t h e i n t e r n a l sequence

Itn]

which i s d e f i n e d by

Since t h e

sn - a n n E N

are infinite for a l l finite Hence, c e r t a i n l y ,

tn f o r

so a r e t h e n E ti

tn2 1 f o r a l l
-P C

But e v e r y non-empty s e t of n a t u r a l nunbers, ir, p o s s e s s e s a s m a l l e s t element. Thus, t h e s e t

as i n

M
1s

{nltn

< 11

e i t h e r empty o r it i n c l x d e s a s m a l l e s t element, which must be

infinit?. t a i n s a n i n z i n i t e element, m

227

)nltn

A. Robinson

I n either case, therefore, the s e t

2 lj

con-

Then

m + '

E< jm

nin

s, 2_ 1

and

for all finite

T h i s p r o v e s 6.1. One of t h e most

7.
and S. Kochen. p-adic f i e l d s where

The theorem o f Ax and Kochen.

s t r i k i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s of Kodel Tieory t o d a t e i s due t o J. Ax The theorem d e a l s with t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e

Rp

and t h e f i e l d s of Laurent s e r i e s Rp[[t]] P i s t h e prime f i e l d o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p , p = 2, 3 , 5 ,

... .

W c o n s i d e r s e n t e n c e s about a f i e l d e

w i t h nonG

archimedean v a l u a t i o n i s an o r d e r e d commutative group

The

vocabulary of o u r s e n t e n c e s s h a l l c o n s i s t of a r e l a t i o n symbol f o r equality, E(x,y)

r e l a t i o n symbols

F(x)

and

G(x)

for

t h e p r o p e r t y of b e i n g i n t h e f i e l d o r i n t h e group, r e s p e c t i v e y, S(x,y,z) field, T(x,y,z)

P(x,y,z)

f o r a d d i t i o n and m u l t i p l i c a t i o n i n t h e x

Q(x,y) f o r t h e order r e l a t i o n f o r a d d i t i o n i n t h e group and

<

i n t h e group, f o r the relay

V(x,y)

t i o n which a p p l i e s i f

x i s i n t h e f i e l d and
where y belongs to

is t h e value
(Actu.ally~

of

y = v(x)

,
Let

some of t h e s e r e l a t i o n s ~ y x b o l scan be e l i m i n a t e d w i t h o u t l o s s of g s n e r a l i t y . ) vocabulary.

K

be t h e s e t of a l l s e n t e n c e s i n t h i s

7.1.
number p

T h e o r ~ ~ x - K o c h e n ) .Let p0 = po(X)

X E K

Then t h e r e

e x i s t s a prime n m b e r

such t h a t f o r any prime i f and c n l y i f it h o l d s i n

p ,

,X

holds i n

R,NtIl

- 228

A . Robinson

I n t h e i r s e r i e s of p a p e r s ( r e f s . 1 , 2 )

which c o n t a i n s

7.1' a s i t s most conspicuous r e s u l t , Ax and Kochen u s e i n t h e

first p l a c e t h e method of u l t r a p r o d u c t s but t h e y a l s o prove

t h e e x i s t e n c e o f d e c i s i o n p r o c e d u r e s f o r t h e p-adic f i e l d s

Qp by methods which depend on t h e n o t i o n o f model-completeness

e x p l a i n e d i n s e c t i o n 4 above. More r e c e n t l y , Paul Cohen ( r e f . 3 )

h a s worked o u t such procedures e f f e c t i v e l y and h a s a l s o provided a n a l t e r n a t i v e proof of 7.1, now g i v e a proof o f 7.1. Analysis. Cohenvs paper i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d by Ye s h a l l

its d i r e c t n e s s and r e l i a n c e on first p r i n c i p l e s only.

w i t h i n t h e framework o f Non-standard

While o u r method i s i n p r i n c i p l e c l o s e r t o t h a t

used by Ax and Kochen, vre s h a l l be a b l e t o d i s p e n s e with many of t h e r e s u l t s from a l g e b r a i c For any prime nunber and
Rp[[t]]

f i e l d t h e o r y on which t h e y r e l y . p

we may e x p r e s s both
Q~

a s systems o f sequences of n a t u r a l numbers.

Accordingly, t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s may b e regarded a s p a r t of t h e h i g h e r o r d e r s t r u c t u r e of t h e r a t i o n a l i n t e g e r s ,

(or,

a l t e r n a t i v e l y , a s p a r t of t h e h i g h e r o r d e r s t r u c t u r e of t h e n a t u r a l numbers, enlargement

*2

N).
of
Z

It f o l l o w s t h a t a s we p a s s . t o a n
t h e r e a r e associated p in

(positive) i n f i n i t e prine and

Q~

*Z

51~0 with

every

corresponding s t r u c t u r e s

Rp[[t]]

!'re o b s s r v e t h a t f o r both f i n i t e and i n f i n i t e

t h e sequences which d e f i n e t h e elements o f

have t e r m s corresponding t o s u b s c r i p t s i n
T~US,

*2

Qp

and of

Rp[[t]]

and noC o n l y i n

a t y p i c a l sm u

n-n

antn C

Rp[[t]l

now r a n g e s f r o n a

s t a n d a r d o r non-standard in
,. a

m E

*Z

through a l l h i g h e r v a l u e s

Now l e t

229

A. Robinson

X K

a s c o n s i d e r e d i n Theorem 7.1.

Assuming t h a t t h e a s s e r t i o n o f t h e theorem i s c o r r e c t , holds i n in

Q

X
X

then holds

f o r a n i n f i n i t e prime since p

p . i f and o n l y i f

Rp[[t]]

>

po(X)

Conversel.y, suppose t h a t we p

have shown f o r e v e r y i n f i n i t e prime

if and o n l y i f it h o l d s i n

Rp[[t]]

P Then t h e g r e a t e s t prime

that

holds i n

&

p 1

such t h a t
R

holds i n

holds i n

[t] [] p1 l y we may i d e n t i f y
than pl

b u t n o t i n R [ [t]] , o r e l s e , p1 p1 but not i n Q , must be f i n i t e . Accordingp1 po = po(X) w i t h t h e s m a l l e s t prime g r e a t e r

T h i s shows t h a t 6.1 i s e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e a s s e r t i o n p any

X K

t h a t f o r every i n f i n i t e and
Q~

e i t h e r h o l d s i n both

~ ~ l I t 1 1r ,o
7.2.

e l s e , does not hold i n e i t h e r one o f

these structures.

I n o t h e r words 7.1 i s e q u i v a l e n t t o For any i n f i n i t e p

Theoren.

, the

fields

Q P of

and

R [[t]] a r e e l e m e n t a r i l y e q u i v a l e n t

i n t h e vocabul r y

I n o r d e r t o prove 7.2, we s h a l l first develop t h e

t h e o r y of pseudo-convergence o f Cstrotrski and Kaplansky ( r e f . 7 ) a s f a r as f a r a s we r e q u i r e it here.

8.
characteristic

Pseudo-convergence.
0

Let

be a f i e i d o f
G

w i t h v a l u a t i o n i n group v(x)

W denote e except

t h e v a l u a t i o n f u r c t i o n by for

,
,

so t h a t

v(x) 6 G

x =0 F

f o r which

v(G){=

tie a l s o suppose t h a t t h e v(a)

0

valuation is non-trivial so thaf in

f o r some

a =/= 0

A t t h i s p o i n t , no

non-standard A n a l y s i s i s involved

- 230 scripts in

4. Robinson

s o t h a t any sequence i s t a k e n t o be a n o r d i n a r y sequence vrith sub-

.
F

A sequence of elements o f

{ao, al,

a29

"-1
po < p < 6 <
Po

i s c a l l e d p s e u d o - c o n l ~ f ~h e r e e x i s t s a n a t u r a l nm15er i~ t
such t h a t f o r a l l n a t u r a l numbers we have t h e i n e q u a l i t y

p,

C , T f o r which Y

i s s a i d t o be a p s e u d o - l i m i t of a saqucnce of e l e m e n t s
a a ,

of

...]
6

i f t h e r e e x i s t s a n a t u r a l number

Po

such t h a t f o r a l l

>p

>.r0

W prove some s!.nple consequences of t h e s e d e f i n i e tions.

8.3.
definition.

I.ema.

let

{ap]

b e a pseudo-convergent

sequence, and l e t

po

be a s u i t a b l e c o n s t a n t a s named i n t h e

Then f o r a l l
v(a,-3~1

cr

> p > po ,
1 P o- > p +
a

= v(apcl-

-Proof.

It i s s u f f i c i e n t t o asswr,e

F o r such

v(a,-a

= ~ ( ( a , - $ + ~ ) + (%+1 -a

11

W write e

a -a ~

increases s t r i c t l y f o r

1+ =

Y ~

, p = O , 1, 2,

.... [ up]

>Po*

- 231

A. Robinson

8.4.
for all for all

Lemna.

Supposs

(a,]

i s pseudo-convergent.
v(ap)

Either there exists a natural

such t h a t

p > or a >T
<_ v ( a T
)

> v(a ) P
=~ ( a ~ + ~ )

there exists a

such t h a t

v(a,)

.
With

po

a s b e f o r e , suppose t h a t

v(aC+,)
6

f o r some

T > po

> T +1 ,
v(ar

V ( C ) = ~ ( a ? + ~ ) For i f t h i s were n o t t h e c a s e =rnin(v(a,)

Then f o r any

then

-+) c 1

, ~ ( a ? + ~ )I ~ ( a * + ~ w h i l e ) )

v ( a T+l-aT)

2 ~ ( a ~ + But )t h i s would imply ~

c o n t r a r y t o t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a pseudo-convergent sequencs.

8.5.
[ap]

Lenma.

Let

be a p s e u d o - l i x i t o f a s e q u m c e

where

yo

h a s t h e meaning assumed i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n of

a pseudo-limit.

Then

a ]

i s pseudo-convergent and

Proof.

For T - >

u > y >ys

and s i m i l a r l y , But s h o ~ u i n gt h a t

~ ( a ~ - ~ =)v ( ~ - ~ $ , v(a-a )

.
v(ab Also, p u t t i n g

1ap ]

<

v(a-ar)

and s o

i s pseubo convergent.

- aP
P

< v(aT_-ac)
Y P ,

o-

=p +

1 i n 8.6, a o o b t a i n

~ ( a - a) = v ( % + ~ -a ) =

a s asserted.

- 232 -

A. Robinson
t

8.7.
l i m i t of
{a

Lemma.

If

i s a p-seudo-limit o f t h e pseudoa
y E F

convergent sequence {a

f o r some n a t u r a l number Proof. Let

i f and o n l y i f

t h e n any o t h e r v ( a -a)
1

i s a pseudo-

>

po

.
a

for all

p >po ,

po

be a n a t u r a l under s u i t a b l e f o r t h e

d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e pseudo-limit

and suppose t h a t Then, f o r a l l

1

s a t i s f i e s t h e c o n d i t i o n of t h e lemma. v ( a -a
t

6>

p > po ,

= v((a-a
t

(a-a

1)

= min ( y

P'
]

v ( a -a)) =

up
This

and, s i m i l a r l y increasing f o r shows t h a t suppose t h a t

t

v ( a -ac ) = yr

.
a

But

p >yo and
a'

so

v(at-a )

* <

is s t r i c t l y
1

v ( a -ac)

i s a pseudo-limit of { a ]

as w e l l a s

i s a pssudo liniit o f
= v ( a -a )'>y
t

.
>

Conversely, Lap]

Then, f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e But t h e n t h e lemma. v ( a -a)

min(v(a

), -3

p , v(a-a ) P

v(a-a ) )

.P T hPs i
L9t

provS s

8.8.
sequence and l e t

Lemma.

Let

be a pseudo-limit of F

be a pseudo-convergent Lap]

p(x)

be a polynomial w i t h c o e f f i c i e n t i n that

~ ( xE ~ [ x ] ) Then

such

~ ( x ) does n o t raduca t o a c o n s t a n t . p(a)

Lp(a ) ]

pseudo-convergent w i t h pseudo-limit Woof.

Is

L e t p ( x ) be a polynomial o f d e g r e e k >_ 1 , 1 and l e t p . ( x ) = 7 p ( J ) ( x ) j = 1, , k Suppose t o begin J j . w i t h t h a t n o t a l l p . ( a ) v a n i s h and put J xj v ( p j ( a ) ) , j = 1, k Consider t h e T a y l o r expansion

... .

- 233

A. Robinson

The v a l u e s of t h e i n d i v i d u a l t e r n s on t h e r i g h t hanc! s i d e of 8.9 a r e g i v e n by

I n o r d e r t o compare t h e v a l u e s of tvro o f t h e s e t e r m s , and

h.
J

m y

W know t h a t e

P
y

where

n> j

+ j y/o
3

consider t h e r a t i o

Then e i t h e r

increases s t r i c t l y f o r sufficiently large

r = ( h . - h )/(m- j ) J m

sufficiently large case implies t h a t

is smaller than

ultimately (i.e.,

for all

p)
?Lj

or jy

l a t t e r casa l e a d s , ultimately, t o t h e opposite inequality.

P >

> r , u l t i m a t e l y . The f o r m e r + my , u l t i m a t e l y , v h i l e t h e

At

any r a t e , we may conclccle t h a t t h e r e e x i . s t s a j 16 j 5 k . . such t h a t v ( p j ( a ) ( a - a ) J ) is ultimately s z a l l e r than t h e

v a l u e s of a l l t h e o t h e r t e r n s on t h e r i g h t hand s i d e . s u f f i c i e n t l y high

Then, f o r

P,
P

where t h e r i g h t hand s i d e i n c r e a s e s m o n o t o n i c a l l y w i t h . T h i s shows t h a t

{ p(a ))

limit

p(a)

i s pseudo-convergent w i t h pseudo-

tle s t i l l have t o show t h a t t h e e q u a l t o zero. by 8.9.

p .(a) cannot be a l l J For i f t h i s were t h e c a s e t h e n p ( a ) = ? ( a ) ,

G

Bowever, f o r

> p >po,
v ( a + -ac)

ap

a ,

,
P

f o r otherwise for

it would b e i m p o s s i b l e t h a t

P '

>

> v(a

-a ) =

Thus

p(a ) = p(a)

t h e s a x e v a l u e f o r i n f i n i t e l y many v a l u e s o f t h e argumants and t h i s i s i ~ p o s s i b l e .

would imply t h a t

~ ( x )takes

- 234 Let
OF

A. Robinson

be t h e v a l u a t i o n r i n g of
OF = { x E F l v ( x )

and

JF

its

v a l u a t i o n i d e a l , so t h a t Let

2 0]
F

JF = { x E ~ l v ( x > )
and l e t
Ft

01

o*/J~ ,

t h e r e s i d u e c l a s s f i e l d of
OF

be t h e canonical mapping from

onto

. .

r(x) which

A field
t

i s an e x t e n s i o n of

as a valued f i e l d w i l l be c a l l e d an
F
if i t s group of v a l u e s , G

immediate extension of
9

, coin-

c i d e s w i t h t h e group of v a l u e s of c l a s s f i e l d of 8.10. F

F, G,

while t h e r e s i d u e

, F' ,

coincides with

Theorem.

Suppose t h a t t h e f i e l d
G

possesses

a countable group of v a l u e s ,
extension of F

,
F

and l e t

F'

be a n immediate

Let

a E F'

.
F

Then t h e r e e x i s t s a pseudo-

convergent sequence of elements of pseudo-limit of longs t o F

{?] such t h a t
f o r some

a (a ]

is a
be-

[a

and such t h a t no pseudo-limit of

Proof. Then
H

Let

H = {x E

GI
of F

x =v(a-y)

y E F)

does not p o s s e s s a g r e a t e s t e l e m e n t . h

F o r suppose on t h e
H

contrary t h a t v(a-b) = h

i s t h e g r e a t e s t element of
b and F

f o r some element F

and t h a t
G

Since

is the
c E F such

group of v a l u e s of both that v(a-b) = v ( c ) = h F d and

there exists a

And s i n c e there is a

F is the residue class

d E F such t h a t

f i e l d of both

F1 Then

=r

r ( c d / ( a - b ) ) = 1 and so

v(1

- -+-I a -b-

>o
cd)

8.11

v(a

> v(a-b)

=h

But

235-

A. Robinson

b + cd E F

and s o 8.11 c o n t r a d i c t s t h e assumption t h a t

i s t h e g r e a t e s t element o f
Thus,

.
It f o l l o w s t h a t

i s countably i n f i n i t e .
H

t h e r e e x i s t s a s t r i c t l y i n c r e a s i n g sequence o f elements o f which i s c o f i n a l w i t h let Then [a ]

,
P

Let

(y

[a

be a sequence of e l e m e n t s of

be such a sequence and

F

such t h a t

v(a-a ) = Y

t h e first p a r t of t h e t h e o r e n . Assume n e x t t h a t b E F a l s o i s a pseudo-limit o f

i s pseudo-convergent w i t h pseudo-limit a , p r o v i n g

lap]
all

Then

v(a-b)

>
b

But t h i s c o n t r a d i c t s t h e f a c t t h a t can e x i s t .

f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h and hence, f o r v(a-b) E H and The proof of 6.10 i s now

shows t h a t no such complete.

Suppose now t h a t

F
p

i s one o f t h e f i e l d s

Rp[[t]l

w i t h i n a n enlargement

*Z

of

ar P as d e t a i l e d i n t h e

p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n , winere

may be e i t h e r f i n i t e o r i n f i n i t e .
F

Then t h e group o f v a l u e s o f sequences i n into

is j u s t

*Z

W still consider e mappings from

N

i n t h e vabsolute" sense, i.e.

Then

8.12.

Theorem.

Every pseudo-convergent
F

sequence

lap]
in
F

in

p o s s e s s e s a pseudo-limit i n Let !a ]

.
4 .

.
P

Proof.

Acccrding t o s e c t i o n 6 above, t h e r e e x i s t s a n i n t e r n a l

be a pseudo-convergent sequence

sequence that

isn]
P

in

(with s u b s c r i p t s ranging over

--N) such

s =a

for a l l finite

Let

po

be a f i n i t e n a t u r a l .

nugber s u i t a b l e f o r t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a pseudo-convergent

- 236 sequence and l e t a l l finite n

6

A . Robinson

> po ,
such t h a t
By 6.

Then

v (sn-ag ) = yr

1'0;.

.
n . ,

It f o l l o r r s t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a n i n f i n i t e
no_ v(sn-a,
)
. =

n a t u r a l nunber infinite number w n

yc

also f o r all

<

t h e r e e x i s t s an i n f i n i t e . n a t u r a l

po +

2,

...,

which i s s m a l l e r t h a n a l l
r E N

Put for

=a

no- f o r Then

=po +

v(a-ag

) = yo-

c = p o+ l , p o + 2 ,

..., C E N
6 >,oo

But t h e sequence so

[y6]

increases s t r i c t l y f o r a

i s a pseudo-limit o f

and

T h i s p r o v e s 8.12.

9.

Hensclls condition.

Ye r e i u r n t o t h e g e n e r a l

case of a f i e l d

w i t h group o f v a l u e s

The f o l l o w i n g

c o n d i t i o n (winich is c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o a f a m i l i a r l e m a i n c l a s s i c a l v a l u a t i o n t h e o r y ) w i l . 1 be c a l l e d h ' e n s l l ' s c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e remainder of t h e p r e s e n t d i s c u s s i o n . 9.1. H e n s e l f s condi.tion. Let

and l e t

-( ~ ) q
a

+;?1x +

... + - n anx
Let
a E F

,-. q(x)

where

=r(a.) , j =0, j J such t h a t q l ( c ) =/= 0

such t h a t Let r(a) = a

..., n .

be a r o o t of

Then t h e r e e x i s t s p r e c i s e l y one
q(a) = G

a EF

and

.
p

F = R [[t]] be t h e s t a n d a r d f i e l d o f Laurent P s e r i e s w i t h c o e f f i c i e n t s i n t h e prime f i e l d of c h a r a c i a r i s t i c

where

i s a fj.n?.te p r i n e .

Then

i s isomorphic t o

- 237 W a r e going t o r e c a l l a CanLiliar proof of e 9.2. Theorem.

Rp[[t]]

A. Robinson

s a t i s f i e s Henselts ccndition. q ( x ) and r(al) = a

a

Proof. t i o n s of 9.1,

Assuning t h a t

s a t i s f y t h e condi-

choose
?

al

so that

otherv;ise a r b i t r a r y ,

and t h e n d e f i n e

a n , n = 2, 3,

- an -

( q ( a n ) / y (a,) ) a

... - s u c c e s s i v e l y by
{a,) q(a) = 0

T h i s y i e l d s a sequence

an+l vrhich

tends t o a l i m i t

f o r which

I n order t o v e r i f y n = 1, 2,

t h i s a s s e r t i o n , consider successively, f o r for 9-30 Putting v(x)

2 0

.
t

..., and

9 ( a n + xen) = s ( a n ) + x t n q (a,) xn =

bntln

where

v(bn) 2 0

- q(an)/iR 9 (an)
t

, an+l

= an

xntn

, we

obtain

provided vre can show, s u c c e s s i v e l y , t h a t that

t

v(xn)

>0 .

v ( q (a,))

=0

and.

Indeed, f o r

r. = 1

, 5' ( a ) f. 0

implies t h a t yields

v ( q ( a l ) ) = 0 which, t o g e t h e r w i t h v(x,)

v(q(al))

>0
+

20

Supposing t h a t we have a l r e a d y proved o u r a s s e r -

tion for

n 2 1

, 9.4

shows t h a t

v ( ~ ( a , + ~ )2 n )

1 vrhile

implies, t o g e t h e r with Since limit Thus, an+l = an a

v ( q (a,)) = 0

that

v ( q (an+,)) = 0

. .

xnt

, say,

where and

we now s e e t h a t a n converges, t o a a = an + dn t n , n 1 , ~ 5 t hv ( d n ) 2 0

>

r(a) = r ( a )

- 238 with v(en)

A. Robinson
q(a) = O

~(g,)2 0

This proves

.
a
1

I n o r d e r t o prove t h a t the c o n d i t i o ~ s q(a) t h e sane conditions, Put a

t
= ;

, r(a)
t

q(a ) = 0

a,

ynt

,r(al) = a . , n 2 1 , then

a . i s determined u n i q u e l y by u

suppose t h a t

satisfies

where v(yn)

v(h,) 2 0

2 0
n

.
9

provided we can show s u c c e s s i v e l y t h a t But we knovr t h a t q ( a n ) + x n t n 9t ( a n ) = 0 and s o

= hnt2,

(x,-~,)t

q (a,)

Also, hnt2"/q
t

an+l = a, (a,)

xntn

and s o

- an+l

= (yn-xn)tn =

Rearing i n mind t h a t thrn v(yn+,)

v ( q l ( a n ) ) >_ 0 But

we now s e e t h a t i f and s o v(hn)

v ( y n ) >_ 0

>_ 0
This

r ( a t ) = a = r(al)
v(y,)

v(yl) = v((al-al)/t)

shows t h a t
t

>0 ,
a =a
t

,
t

n =1, 2 ,

...
t

.
,n

Hence,

v ( a -a) = v(al-a, This proves t h a t

+ an-a)

rnin(v(a -a,),

v(a-a,))

>n

= 1, 2,

.
p i n p l a c e of proves s a t i s f i e s IIensell s c o n d i t i o n .
Q~

The same argurilent, w i t h

9.5. - Theorex. finite infinite f i e l d of p

p

Although we have f o r m u l a t e d t h e proof of 9.2 ( o r o f 9.5) f o r we may now c a r r y over t h e r e s u i t a l s o t o t h e c a s e of

Ye o b s e r v e t h a t i n t h i s c a s e , t h e r e s i d u e c l a s s $[[t]]

Qp and of

, which
0

i s (isomorphic t o )
applies also t o

i s a c t u a l l y of c h a r a c Z e r 9 s t i c
theorem, v ~ h i c hi s t r i v i a l f o r

Accordingly, t h e f o l l o w i n g
Q~

Rp[[t]]

- 239 9.5.
c o n d i t i o n , 9.1, Them. and t h a t Suppose t h a t F

A. Robinson

s a t i s f i e s Hensel's 0

7
Fo

i s of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

. .

Then

there exists a subfield

of

which i s isomorphic t o from

OF

under t h e c a n o n i c a l mapping Woof. Let

r(x)

onto

F
F'

be t h e s e t of s u b f i e l d s 0

of 0

F
=0

whose e l e m e n t s , o t h e r t h a n for

a E F'

a l l have v a l u a t i o n

, v(a)

i s n o t empty s i n c e it c o n t a i n s t h e
W may a p p l y Zorn's lemma i n o r d e r t o e

f i e l d o f r a t i o n a l numbers.

e s t a b l i s h t h e e x i s t e n c e of e l e m e n t s o f u n d e r t h e r e l a t i o n of i n c l u s i o n . Let

' F

which a r e maximal be one o f t h e s e . W are e

g o i n g t o show t h a t it s a t i s f i e s t h e c o n d i t i o n s of t h e theorem.

A t a n y r a t e , t h e r e s t z i c t i o n of
homoniorphic rnzpping of

r(x)

to

is a
on 0

F'

into

.
= 0

If it were n o t a n F'

isomorphism, it would have t o map a l l e l e m e n t s o f

But t h i s i s n o t t h e c a s e s i n c e

1
Fl of

,(

1= 1

r(x) maps
that F1

F'

on a s u b f i e l d

Hence,

Ye have t o show

=,F

.
Fl

Suppose, on t h e c o n t r a r y , t h a t
Q

f F

and. l e t F 1 then there

- F1 .

If

i s a l g e b r a i c with r e s p e c t t o

e x i s t a n i r r e d u c i b l e polynomial w i t h c o e f f i c i e n t i n

PI

such t h a t such t h a t
j = 0,

s(a) = 0

s t ( a ) fi 0

Choose
a

q(x) E ~ ' [ x ]
= r ( a .)

T(x) = s(x)

..., n

, i. L. ,

such t h a t

, winere

, a J.

E F

- 240 such t h a t r ( a ) = a and F [x]

1

A. Robinson

Since Hensells condition is s a t i s f i e d , there e x i s t s an Q(a) = 0 for if

a E I" must

The polynomial

q(s) there

be i r r e d u c i b l e i n ql(x), q2(x) in F1(x)

q ( x ) = ql(x)q2(x)

a r e polynomials of p o s i t i v e d e g r e e l e s s t h a n

t h e n we nay assume, w i t h o u t l o s s of g e n e r a l i t y , t h a t

ql(a) = 0 so t h a t

But t h e n

~ ( 2 : ) = Gl(x);l2(x)

w h e r ~ ql(a) = 0

ql(x)

i s of p o s i t i v e degree.

This c o n t r a d i c t s t h e

assumption t h a t

s ( x ) i s i r r e d u c i b l e and p r o v e s t h a t
Fl(c) C

i s isomorphic t o
ingly, that
F'

under t h e mapping

r(x)

Ft(a) Accord-

F (a) E

and t h i s i n t u r n c o n t r a d ' i c t s t h e a s s u g ~ t i o n

i s maximal i n

S u p ~ o s en e x t t h e t over a F,

F1 is t r a n s c e n d e n t a l
a = r(a)

Choose

a E F
1

F
F'

such t h a t since

Then

i s transcendental over

q(a1 = 0

polynomial nonzero

~ o l y n o n i a l q(x) E

q ( x ) E F Ex]

would imply F1[x:

-( a ) q

f o r some nonzero for the f o r any

=0

Also,

v(b) = 0

b E ~ ' ( a ) b may assume

1

f o r i f t h i s i s n o t always t h e c a s e t h e n we where q ( x ) E ~ ' [ x ] i s a ncnzero poly<(a) = 0

b = q(a)

nomial and t h i s would a g a i n imply that of F

t

F (a) E

It f o l l o w s

and t h i s a g a i n c o n t r a d i c t s t h e maximality

The proof (I.? 9.5 i s now complete. Even i f we had i n t r o d u c e d t h e f i e l d F

1

i n soma
is

o t h e r way, it would s t i l l be t r u e t h a t i f isomorphic t o

C OF

I?

under t h e mapping

r(x)

then

F'

1s

maximal w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p r o p e r t y t h a t a l l i t s nonzero elements hare value

O

P a r suppose

F" C OF

i s a proper

extension of
F

241

also. such t h a t

A. Robinson
T:ten f o r any

such t h a t

r ( ~ )" =

a E F"
and s o

there exists

a b E F'
a

r(a) = r(b)

r ( a - b ) = 0. tvhere

- b fi 0 .

But t h i s would irnply

r(F1') = 0

,
10.

which is impossible. Extensions. From now on, we s h a l l supposa t h a t By Theorem 9.5.

t h e prime subfield of

is infinite.

Qp

incl-udes a

Qo which i s isomorphic t o t h t r e s i d u e c l a s s f i e l d
The l a t t e r i s isomorphic t o
Thus,

Qp

f i e d w i t h it. mapping f r o m r(x) to

Uo
Rp

P i s isomorphic t o

and may be i d e n t i R

Qo onto

An isomorphic P ' i s provided by t h e r e s t r i c t i o r s o f r0(x)

Qo
Let

t o be denoted by 9(x)

.
B2

be a n a n a l y t i c ( v a l u e p r e s e r v i n g ) i s o El C Qp o n t o a f i e l d El

morphism from a f i e l d

R ((t))

such t h a t t h e common group o f v a l u e s of

and

E2

,M ,

is countable.
c E Qp

Let

{c ]

El which d o e s n o t p o s s e s s a pseudo-limit i n El

b e a pseudo-convergent sequence i.n and l e t

- El

be a pseudo-limit of

[c

l i m i t e x i s t s , by 8.2. 10.1.

Consider t h e s e t of sequences. were q ( x ) 6 E3.[x], q ( x ) of p o s i t i v e degree.

Such a pseudo-

S = { { 9(c ) ] ]

These s e q u e n c e s a r e pseudo-convergent, w i t h p s e u d o - l i m i t s
q(c)

by v i r t u e of L e m a 6.8.

According t o Lemma g . 4 , Either

tie

may d i s t i n g u i s h j u s t two p o s s i b i . l i t i e s .
10.2.

-T such
Or

For every

[9(cp)] E S

there exists a

that

v(q(c

1)

= v ( q ( ~ ~ + ~o ) )a l l f r

P >P

--

- 242 10.3. There e x i s t s a

A . Robinson
E S

1)) v ( q ( c
depends on q(x)

))

for all

P p greater

[q(c )

such t h a t which

t h a n some

.
[>I

For a r e a s o n which w i l l become a p p a r e n t , s a i d t o be

is
algebraic

of

transcendental

i n c a s e 10.2, and

i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e c a s e , i0.3 Supposing f i r s t t h a t type, l e t

.
,
{~p]
in

of

{cp]

i s of t r a n s c e n d e n t a l

{ q( c ) I E S

10.2, and l e t

, with

i ? a s mentioned i n a suitable '

Qp

be any pseudo-limit of

-- . 4

Consider t h e T a y l o r expansion of

g ( x ) about c

1 q.(x) = 7 q(j)(x) Choose 0-2 T s o t h a t J J v(q,(c I ) , v ( ~ ( c ~ a l) l remain c o n s t a n t f o r p )

where put v(q.(c )) = p j ,
J

u(dc ))

...
p
j

> o-

and

one o f t h e

j =1,

..., k

f o r such o ,
co)

At least

must be f i n i t e ( n o t e q u a l t o

since

q(x)

i s n o t c o n s t a n t , by assurn;?tj.on.

Then, f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h

Comparing two such t e r m s vfnich a r e f i n i t e , we s e e as i n t h e proof o f 8.9. t h a t j u s t one of them w i l l u l t i m a t e l y , i . e . , f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y high Let t h i s term be 10.6.
hy
Q ,

,
-

be s m a l l e r t h a n a l l t h e o t h e r s .

+ Ph ,

then

v(q(c)

But t h e r3.ght h n d s i d e o f 10.6 i s s t r i c t l y i n c r e a s i n g

q ( c ) ) = n i n (jy f' l<_j<k

+ pj) -

- h>

Rh

f o r sufficiently large while v( q(c)) and

243

A. Robinson

p ,
P

since

v(q(c ) )

do n o t v a r y w i t h

i n c r e a s e s f o r such

ultimately.

This i s possible only if 10.7. v(q(c)) = v(q(c S i n c e t h e sequence

1) f o r suffj.ciently l a r g e

P
p

[q(c ) ]

i t s t e r m s cannot v a n i s h i d e n t i c a l l y f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e
Accordingly q(c )

i s pseudo convergent,

q(c)

T h i s shows that

f o r sufficiently large

and hence, El

i s transcendental over

Observe t h a t a l t h o u g h we have proved 10.7 o n l y f o r non-constant q(x)

it i s t r i v i a l l y t r u e f o r c o n s t a n t

q(x) also.

Consider now t h e sequence sequence i s pseudo-convergent

{8(c ) ]

SI-nce 8

i s a n a n a l y t i c isomor-

in

E2

This

phism, and it d o e s n o t have a pseudo-limit i n by 8.12, (B(c ) )

E2

However,

i s of t r a n s c e n d e n t a l t y p e , [ 0 ( c ) } a l s o must be P since o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l t y p e . Repeating t h e a n a l y s i s which l e d t o

10.7, w i t h i n Rp((t))

does have p s e u d o - l i m i t s i n

Rp((t))

A: :o,

r e f i n d t h a t f o r any polynomial
.

~ ( x )

with coefficient i n of {B(c ) ]

E2 and f o r any pseudo-limit

E Rp((t))

E2

we have v ( s ( c ) )*= v(s(@(c ) ) )

?

10.8.

for sufficiently large

P o
t

It foll-oers t h a t

is transcendental over
5 (7 0
which maps

E2

Thus, t h e r e on EZ(c )

i s a unique isomorphisn
so t h a t
C'

F1(c)

= 5 (c)

:!e wish t o show t h a t t h i s isomorphism

i s a n a l y t i c o r (-8rhich i s o n l y a p p a r e n t l y a weaker s t a t e m e n t )

t h a t for/. any q(x) E

244

such t h a t

A. Robinson

%[XI,

s ( x ) E E2[x]

v ( ~ ( c )=v(s(cl)) ) v(q(c)) = v(q(c

But, f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y h i g h o , v(q(c
0
1

,
v(s(c ))
9

1)

and

1)

= v(s(e(c

0( 4 ( c ) ) = s ( e ( c p ) )

where

is analytic.

P 1))

and

Hence,

= v(e(q(c )) = v(q(c )) = v(q(c))

analytic.

ifTe sum up o u r c o n c l u s i o n i n

.
E2

T h i s shows t h a t

is

10.9. and Icy]

Lemma.

c E Qp
and

El

,c

{cp] E Rp((t)) If

is a transcendental type
a r e p s e u d o - l i m i t s of
6

l B ( ~ g ) ] respectively, then
El(c)

can be extended to E2(c )

1

t o a n a n a l y t i c a l isonorphisin from Suppose ne;;:

.
is
v ( q ( ~ p + ~< ) ) q ( ~ E sl[x] )

t h s t 10.3 a p p l i e s s o t h a t

[cp]

of a l g e b r a i c t y p e .
such t h a t from some

Then t h e r e e x i s t s a polynomial

up

, ,

v ( q ( c 1)

E v i d e n t l y , t h e s e p o l y n o n i a l s n u s t be of p o s i t i v e d e g r e e and ws choose one of them,

w(x)

< v(q(c

<

rr(x)

!.rhose d e g r e e i s a s s m a l l a s p o s s i b l ~ .

{co] in
J

.
(C

w i l l t h t n be cal-led a n i n i m a l p o l y n o n i a l f o r t h e g i v e n

If

v ( x ) = ?t:l(x)w2(~) where and of s n a l l c r d e g r e e s t h a n

vl(r)

and

vp(x)

are

%[XI

and
V(W

v(w ( c ) )

of Let

l P 2 P
vI(x) d

11.;

JO
(C

v(vr ( c ) ) 1- P a r e u l - t i n a t e l y c o n s t a n t and s o t h e r e f o r 2 i s

v(x)

then

) ) = V ( P I ( C) )

T h i s sl?or.;s t h a t

contradicting the definition v(x)

is irreducible i n
d

Zl:1[x]

be the d e ~ r e e f o

w(x)

2 1

- 245 w.(x) = - ( ) (x) J j! polynomjals of degrea l e s s t h a n d a t e l y constant a s v a l u e by Let

A. Robinson
j = 1,

,
,

... d
J

These a r e

so

v(w.(c ) )

is ultim-

i n c r e a s e s and we d e n o t e t h i s u l . t i n a t e

bj

,j

= 1,

,d

W a r e g o i n g t o show t h a t , e

f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y high

p ,

The a s s e r t i o n d e a i s w i t h t h e c a s e sufficiently large T a y l o r expansion of

For

P
?

and

C>P
about

we t h e n o b t a i n f o r t h e

w (c,)

>'

A s h e f o r e , j.ust one of t h e v a l u e s of t h e t e r m s on
t h e r i g h t hand s i d e of 1 0 . 1 1 i s u l t i m a t e l y s m a l l e r t h a n a l l

o t h e r s and s o v(w ( c r ) A t t h e same t i m e

?

(C

1)

= min

jp)

andso

blL

Y - . + (j-1)y

P '

j = 2 ,

..., d
( j-1) Y

But t h e r i g h t

hand s i d e of t h i s i n e q u a l i t y i s s t r i c t l y i n c r e a s i n g and s o we have, more s h a r ~ l f , P1 < L which i s e q u i v a l e n t t o 10.$0. By 8.12, [c )

P ,j

= 2,

..., d
9

,
W e

propose t o show t h a t one of t h e s e i s a r o o t of

possesses pseudo-limits i n w(x)

-P

Thus,

- 246 let
c be a pseudo-limit of Suppose ur(c) {cf] have f i n i s h e d . Choose

.4. Robinson

If

w(c) = 0

t h e n ire

By 10.10

h E Qp s o t h a t

v(h) =v(w(c)) -Yl

, 3 o~ , so t h a t

.
h :O

Consider t h e polynomial

then

where t h e v a l u e of

,j

is

Thus, f o r

j = 1

Ve c l a i m t h a t i

I n o r d e r t o confirm 10.16, we w r i t e , f o r

o >J, -

where tre choose s i d e , except

s o l a r g e t h a t t h e t e r m s on t h e r i g h t hand

w(c )

t h a t 10.10 a p p l i e s . Suppose t h a t v(w(c

,
1)

have r e a c h e d t h e i r u l t i m a t e v a l u e s and

y e t h e n keep

f i x e d and l e t

s increase.

Y1 + Y

Then 10.17 y i e l d s

- 247

A.

Robinson

which i s independent of that v(w(cC ) )

c7

.
+
y

But t h i s c o n t r a d i c t : ; t h e f a c t

i n c r e a s e s i n d e f i n i t e l y and proves tihat

v(w(c ) ) = yl

,
+

f o r sufficiently large

Also, w(c)

- vr(c ) P

= (c-c

P l P
( )c) =Y1

)W

(C

... + (c-cP.drr )
P,
y

((c

jO

and s o , t a k i n g v a l u e s f o r s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e 10.19. v(w(c)

-~

for suffjciently large

P+
J

Hence, from 10.18 v(w(c)) = V(W(C)

and 11.19

,
min(v(w(c)-w(c

- M(C ) + W(C ) I > P P

P

and f u r t h e r , from 10.14, f o r j = 2, v ( s ~ ) > > ~ j-1 + ( j - l ) ( $ + y j T h i s proves 10.1.6. Let

..., d

1 ) ,v(w(c ) ) I

)=%-y+(j-l)y

= V.+jy -O/ 1 p )> +Y J p

?l(x) be t h e image of

Y(x)

under ~ I l e mapping
R

r ( x ) of
10.16

Qp

j.nto t h e r e s i d u e c l a s s f i e l d

'

r:p 10.15 and

m(x) = 1 +

Sl%

where

sl = r ( s l )

s1

Put

a =

then

!!(a) =

, V ( a ) = s1 # '
Q

. .

Hence, by

H e n s e l f s c o n d i t i o n , 9.1, vinich h o l d s f o r m E Qp such t h a t

Y(m) = 0 , r (m) = a

ther.1: e x i s t s an P' Hence, v(n) = 0

- 248 r e c a l l i n g 10.12, r o o t of w(x) w(c Also,

A.

Robinson

hm) = 0

, so

that

= c

h m

is a

f o r sufficiently large l i m i t of { c ]

P
If

and s o , by Lemma 8 . 7 ,

i s a pseudo-

Summing up Lema.

-[c

10.20. algebraic type i n w(x) E El[x]

El C Qp w i t h o u t pseudo-limit i n m i n i n a l polynomial f o r [cp]

i s pseudo-convergent of
El and then there

is a

e x i s t s a pseudo-lirxit of

[cp]

which i s a r o o t o f Rp( ( t1 )

corresponding r e s u l t h o l d s f o r

w(x)

Suppose t h a t ' t h e r e i s a n a n a l y t i c isomorphisn from in El El C

8(x)

QP t o E2
[cp]
3

C R p ( ( t ) ) a s a t t h e beginning of t h e

s e c t i o n and l e t

be pseudo-convergent o f a l g e b r a i c t y p e

without pseudo-limit i n {cp] {cpj wg(x) we(x)

El

polynomial f o r
2, otherwise

Let w(x)

W ( X ) be a minimal must be a t l e a s t El

The d e g r e e o f

would have a pseudo-limit i n be t h e image o f w(x) in

, by
under

10.20. 8 bl

Let

E2[x] (8(c ) }

Then

i s a minimal polynomial f o r
w(x)

be a r o o t of

which i s a pseudo-limit of b2

Let

bl E Qp

- El

[cP]

and l e t

pseudd-limit o f

[Q(c ) ]

. Then--

be a r o o t of

wg(x)

which i s a

10.21.. Lemma.

There e x i s t s a n a n a l y t i c isomorphism E2(b2)

5 3 8 from

El(bl)

onto

.
8

Indeed, l e t to El(bl) such t h a t

5'
b

be t h e c a n o n i c a l e x t e n s i o n of
=b

W have t o shorr t h a i e

5
as

249

El(bl)

A.

Robinson

is a n a l y t i c .
q(bl) where

Now, every elernent of q ( x ) E E1[x]

can be w i t t e n w(x)

i s of lower d e g r e e t h a n
{v(~(c 1 1)

Accordingly, t h e sequence of v a l u e s

c o n s t a n t and (compare t h e argument l e a d i n g t o 10.7)

= v(q(c ))

is ultimately
v(q(bl))

c o n t i n u e t h e r e a s o n i n g e x a c t l y a s i n t h e proof of 10.9, Let

C

f o r sufficiently large

From t h i s p o i n t , we may

El C

Up

The a l g e b r a i c c l o s u r e

of

El

&

El

i s defined as t h e f i e l d of elements o f
El

algebraic with respect t o

If

t o be a l g e b r a i c a l l y c l o s e d i n notions'for

Qp

R ((t)) P

.
El El

El = El

Q which a r e P t h e n El is s a i d

'

There a r e c o r r e s p o n d i n g

Suppose t h a t

contains the f i e l d

Qo which was
Then t h e r e s i d u e

i n t r o d u c e d a t t h e beginning of t h i s s e c t i o n . class field

xl

of

is R
so
Q~

c l a s s f i e l d of

Qp

, and
El in

P El

'

which i s a l s o t h e r e s i d u e cannot b e extended on p a s s i n g Let

t o a n e x t e n s i o n of of in -

.
for

H
*
.c

be t h e group o f v a l u e s

*Z

El

and suppose t h a t
, i.e.,

i s c o u n t a b l e and t h a t it i s pure
Z E

that

n Z E H

andfinite

n ,

implies

z E H

Now f o r e v e r y El

with respect t o beldng t o belong t o of El

. H .
H

a E Q which i s algebraic P some f i n i t e m u l t i p l e of v ( a ) must H

i s pure i n
ry

Thus, i f

*Z

v(a)

must i t s e l f

It follovrs t h a t

El

i s a n immediate e x t e n s i o n

.
With t h e s t a t e d dssumptions on El

, let

B(x)

be a n

a n a l y t i c isomorphism from 10.22. Theoren.

El

onto

E2 C R p ( ( t ) )

Then

There e x i s t s a n a n a l y t i c isomorphism

5 3 8 from

h.

El

onto

CY

E2

- 250 Proof.
h

A. Robinson

Let F 1
C

be t h e s e t of a l l ana1yti.c i s o m o r p h i s n s and. r a n g e F2 such t h a t

E;

a- 3 8 w i t h domain
and
E2 C F2 C E2

1 i s n o t empty s i n c e it i n c l u d e s

C F

C El

8. .

i s p a r t i a l l y o r d e r e d under t h e r e l a t i o n of i n c l u s i o n and e v e r y
l i n e a r l y ordered subset t h e u n i o n of
S

of

h a s a n upper bound i n

-E ;

Accordingly, Z o r n 7 s lemina a p p l i e s and Let and

I

c o n t a i n s maximal elements.

oZ2
I

be one of t h e s e , and l e t

E ;

be t h e domain o f

i t s range.

Suppose t h a t c E Qp

is not a l g e b r a i c a l l y clossd i n
a l g e b r a i c with r e s p e c t t o extension of El

'
Then

and l e t El(c)
t

E l

be

i s a n irrmediate

El

s o t h e r e e x i s t s a pseudo-convergent sequence

Icy]
in

in

E;

w i t h pseudo-l'rnit

but without pseudo-limit For if q ( x ) E E;[XI

El

[$]

n u s t be of a l g e b r a i c t y p e .

such t h a t
if

q(c) = 0

q(x)

i s of p o s i t i v e d e g r e e , t h e n

{ v ( q ( c p )]

were u l t i m a t e l y c o n s t a n t , t h i s wou1.d l e a d t o 10.7 Thus w(3 ) = 0 f o r s o n s bl 1 and whicn i s a l g e b r a i c w i t h w(x) whi.ch i s Let

and, h e n c e , t o a contraclic1;ion. which i s a p s e u d o - l i n i t of respect t o irreducible

.

[c,,]

El
ifi

, and
EL[x]
t

f o r some polynomial
t

and of second d e g r e e , a t l e a s t . vr(x) in E2[x]

~ ~ ( be ) h e i r n a ~ eof x t

then

we(b2) = 0
e x i s t s an a n a l y t i c

f o r some

b2 E R p ( ( t ) )

-3

r2

.
Up

Ey 10.21 onto
r

, there
E2(S2)

isomorphism 5 3 a P r o n

El(bl)

R r ~ tt h i s

c o n t r a d i c t s t h e z a x i n a l i t y of

and s o we c c n c l u d e :hat
=E
h.

El

i s a l g e b r a i c a l l y c l o s e d 5n

, El?

.
I

I n o r d e r t o complete

t h e proof we o n l y have t o i n t e r c h a n g e t h s r o l e s o f
R ( ( t ) ) -,. o r e a c h t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t P

and

E2 = E 2

- 251 F i n a l l y , we observe 10.23.

A.

Robinson

--

L e m ~ . Suppose t h a t El

Qo

c El

C Qp

and t h s t
4 ,

t h e group of v a l u e s of El

i s c o u n t a b l e and pure i n
Qp

-2

Then

is a l g e b r a i c a l l y closed i n
{cf]
El

i f and o n l y i f a l l psendowhich a r e of a l g e b r a i c t y p e

convergent sequences have p s e u d o - l i m i t s i n Rp((t))

in

El

A corresponding r e s u l t holds f o r

.
Proof. The c o n d i t i o n

is sufficient.

For i f

c E El

is algebraic with respect t o

{C

but without p s e u d o - l i ~ i r ; i n

P]

t h e n t h e r e e x i s t s a sequence X1 which i s pseudo-convergent i n El w i t h pseudo-limit c

El

Since

q(c) = 0

f o r some {cp]
2

nonzero p o l y n o ~ i a l q ( x ) E Zl[x] must be o f a l g e b r a i c type.

we s e e a s b e f o r e t h a t

The c o n d i t i o n i s a l s o n e c e s s a r y . pseudo-convergent of a l g e b r a i c t y p e i n
l i m i t in

For if

(c

El w i t h o u t pssudof o r sore pseudo-liait

is

El

and

rr(x) E EICx]
Evidently,
Qp

i s a minimal polynomial f o r

[;o]
c E Pp

t h e n 10.20 s h o ~ s h a t t of

w(c) = 0 c
E,

{ ~ p ].
1 . 1 -Proof

so

El

cannot b e

algebraically closed i n

of-the

theorem of A x

and Kochen.-

The

theorem of Ax and Kochen, 7.1., s e c t i o n 7 , above. that, for infinite

h a s been reduced t o 7.2 i n i n o r d e r t o show

I n o r d e r t o prove 7.2, i . e .
p

C, $

and

Rp( ( t ) a r e e l e n e n t a r y )

e q u i v a l e n t i n t h e s t a t e d vocabul.ary, we s h a l l rsly on t h e t e s t

5.1 w i t h

it1 =
Q~

of mappings

, A , which

!I .2

R ( (t))
?

Ve have t o s e l e c t a f a n l i l y See t h e

m e e t s t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f 5.1.

- 252 beginning of s e c t i o n 1 0 f o r t h a d e f i n i t i o n of

A.

Robinson

:Qo and

ro = r O ( x )
A

,/\-

s h a l l c o n s i s t of a l l a n a l y t i c isomorphic mappings

from s u b f i e l d s of

t o s u b f i e l d s of

1 . . 11
and A(Qo) = R

X 3 ro

R ( ( t) ) P

such t h a t X includes

Thus, t h e domain of

Qo

P '
The group of v a l u e s
GX

11.2. X
*

of t h e domain o f
*

( o r , which i s t h e s a n e , of i t s r a n g e ) i s a c o u n t a b l e pure
*Z

subgroup o f n

Thus, i f

ng E GX

for

g E -Z

and

n E 11

#0 ,

then

g E GX

11.3.
of X and

For a n y

X(pk) = t k

h E GX

, pk

i s c o n t a i n e d i n m e domain

The f o l l o w i n g example shotrs t h a t

h i s n o t empty and

i s a l s o i n s t r u c t i v e i n o t h e r ways.
Let adjoining t o Q o ( p ) and
R ( t ) be t h e f i e l d s o b t a i n e d by P t h e elements p E Qp and t E R p ( ( t ) )

P r e s p e c t i v e l y , where by "adjunction" we mean

Qo and

--

h e r e and f o r t h e

remainder of t h i s c o u r s e

--

t h a t we c o n s i d e r o n l y r a t i o n a l

f u n c t i o n s o f t h e element i n q u e s t i o n , whose numerators and denominators have f i n i t e degrees. then where q ( t ) = co n

clt

... + c n t n

Similarly, if for c. E R J P '

q ( t ) E $[t] O < j < n ,

i s a f i n i t e n a t u r a l number.
Observe t h a t

i s transcendental over

Qo and

is transcendental over
X from Qo(p) onto

Thus, t h e r e i s a unique isonorphism P ' R p ( t ) which s a t i s f i e s A = ro on and

FL

<> -

X i s even a n a l y t i c f o r i f

c = c0 and

clp

... +

cnP" E Qo[pj

cn

then

v(c) = n

- 253 v(h(c)) = v(ro(co) belongs t o

-12-

A. Robinson = n

+ ro(cl)t +

... + r o ( c n l t n )
F , .
( = F1 0

Thus

.
h

Let of
h

E fl and l e t
F 1
X

C Qp
Let

be t h e domain

and

F2 = ~ 6 ' ) C R ( ( t ) ) Q

element of

.
t

i t s range.

a be any
is satisfied
and

I n o r d e r t o show t h a t 5.3
EJ L

we have t o f i n d a includes a

which i s an e x t e n s i o n of

i n i t s domain.

For convenience we s h a l l d e n o t e
F
?

t h e group of v a l u e s of

F ~ O ) and X

Ch

a l s o by

H(O)

The d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a s u i t a b l e For t h e f i r s t s t a g e c o n s i d e r of Fl(a) coincides with

requires several stages.

Fl(a)

I f t h e group of v a l u e s

Gh

go on t o t h e second s t a g e ( s e c b E Fl(a) Fl(b)

t i o n 1 2 , below). so that v(b) = m

I n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e c a s e , choose

.' Then t h e group of v a l u e s o f

*Z
+
nm
f o r some g E Gh *Z

Hb

i s j u s t t h e subgroup o f

which i s g e n e r a t e d by

Hb = [ z E Define

*z]

z = g

and

n E Z] by

H ( ' )

a s t h e p u r e h u l l of
z E H~

Hb i n

, i. e.

~ ( 1 = [ z *zln ) Then
H(l)

f o r some

n E N

,n

+ 01
Also, H(l)

includes

Hb

and i s s t i l l c o u n t a b l e . Fl(a)

i n c l u d e s t h e g r o u p of v a l u e s o f F,(a)

s i n c e e v e r y element of and s o i t s v a l u e
C

i s algebraic with respect t o

Fib Evidently, ~ l l = F!o)( )

Fl(b)

i s o b t a i n e d from a n elemenF of
n a t u r a l number. Put

by d i v i s i o n by a s t a n d a r d

H ( ~ ) i s pure i n

($1

where

ranges over t h e

e l e m e n t s of and d e f i n e n E N, n

H(')

- 254 Let
4 .

A.

Robinson

K ( ~ ) be t h e group of v a l u e s o f

Fll)(a)

H ( ~ ) by
0)

i s pure i n

: :

. Then K . Next, p u t
HI3

H ( ~ = i z E *Zlnz E K ( ~ ) o r some ) f and H ( ~ ) r e c o u n t a b l e and a

k

H(2)
ranges

F.i2) = F ! ~ ) ( { ~ ~ ]where ) by

o v e r t h e elements of of

H ( ~, let )

K ( ~ ) t h e g r o u p of v a l u e s be

F I 2 ) ( a ) and d e f i n e n E N, n

H3 =

{Z

E*Ze;~lnzE K ( 2 )

for This

some

f. 0 )

Repeat t h i s p r c c e s s i n d e f i n i t e l y .

y i e l d s sequences

o f f i e l d s and g r o u p s r e s p e c t i v e l y where t h e g r o u p s a l l c o u n t a b l e and p u r e i.n

*Z

H(")

are

.
Z k

Let
K

E = 1

Fin)

K =

U K(")
and

~3'")

so t h a t

i s c o u n t a b l e and i s t h e
Moreover,

group of v a l u e s of t h e f i e l d

*Z

K
K

i s pure i n

El = Fl( [ $ I )

where

ranges over

W s h a l l 7ro-Je t h a t t h e r e i s an a n a l y t i c isomorphism, e
3 X

fmn

El

onto a subfield
pk E El

E2 Let

of

(pk) = tk for a l l

R ( ( t ) ) such t h a t P be t h e s e t of a n a l y t i c

isomcrphisms

41 from

s u b f i e l d s of

El o n t o s u b f i e l d s of

Rp( ( t) )

vrhich s a t i s f ' y t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s . 11.4.

i s a n e x t e n s i o n of
X

Let and l e t

and

'f I Ep

be t h e domain and r a n g e of

q ,r e s p e c t i v e l y ,
Then

be t h e i r c o ~ ~ n ogroup of' v a l u e s . ii ( o r , which i s t h e s a n e ,

8 i s pure i n
K)

H c K ez

=Y

i s pure i n

and f o r e v e r y

- 255 The s e t

A. Robinson

i s n o t empty s i n c e it i n c l u d e s i l

Also,

' f is in and

p a r t i a l l y o r d e r e d under t h e r e l a t i o n of i n c l u s i o n and p o s s e s s e s an uppar bound

every l i n e a r l y o r d e r e d s u b s e t of

T--t s union. i
%

Accordingly, Z o r n f s lemma i s a p p l i c a b l e

c o n t a i n s maximal elements.

denote it by

q.

Let

El

Ve p i c k one, of them and i and l e t

be t h e domain o f El

be t h e group o f v a l u e s o f

?Ve c l a i m t h a t

=K

t h i s i s not t h e case, l e t dental over n E m

El

m K

- Ti .
n

T I
If
then

Then

pm i s t r a n s c e n -

; f o r if
*Z

pm were a l g e b r a i c over

El

since

f o r some f i n i t e i n t e g e r

.
E2

But t h e n

i s pure i n

is transcendental over

El

contrary t o

m E K

-3.

m E

TI
pm

Thus

Also, i f

i s t h e r a n g e of
pm <->

F,
p ~ )

t h e n t h e same argument. shbws t h a t over

extends onto

- . E2 -

tn' i s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l tm ~ ~ (

~ c c o r d i n i l ~h e correspondence t , t o a n a l g e b r a i c isomorphism

-2 ( t m ) Z

.
i s even a n a l y t i c .
For l e t

'

from

x E El($)

It
so t h a t

is s u f f i c i e c t t o consider t h e casa
11.5.

x E1[pm]

,x # 0
E El

x = a0

al Pm

... + ahpkrn

,aj

where n o t a l l c o e f f i c i e n t s vanish.
'2

TI en t h e v a l u e s of t h e

non-vznishing t e r m s on t h e r i g h t hand s i d e of 11.5 a r e a l l different since v~ouldimply pure i n

V(X)

v(ajpd") = ~ ( a , ~ " ~o)r f

J

aj

, at # 0
3 is

*Z

( 4 - j ) m = v ( a ./@

, rn E

since

Hence,

= min(v(ai)

jm) = min(

(a;)

jrn)

- 256 T h i s shows t h a t

A.

Robinson

$'

is analytic.

The group o r v a l u e s of

El($)
for
4 ,

and of

F,*(trfi)
c Z j

is

K ={zE"*z
Let
H'

.. .

z=h+nm Kt in

~ E T T ,n

b e t h e p u r e h u l l of
?

+Z

,
n E M

H = { z E *ZInx E K'
W obtain e

f o r some

,n

+ 01
K
I

H '

from

K'

by d i v i d i n g t h e elements o f
4 ,

s u c c e s s i v e l y and r e p e a t e d l y , by f i n i t e prima numbers, provided t h e r e s u l t i s a n element o f o b t a i n an extension pp E F; whenever

$

"Z

F;

of

-~ ~

Correspondingly, we may

( p * )F C El , 1 pq/'.
p

such t h a t

E H'
pP

by s u c c e s s i v e a d j u n c t i o n s of where h a s been a d j o i n e d preW t h e r e f o r e assurt1a t h a t e El(pm)

e l e m e n t s of th forrm

v i o u s l y , f o r some f i n i t e prime
pqP E

F 1

f o r some e x t e n s i o n pP

F1

.
of

, - c F1

El

, pP

E El

but t h a t

& P1 and Fz

we f u r t h e r assume t h a t we have a l r e a d y

obtained an extension on a n e x t e n s i o n all pk E TI of

-2 ( t m ) E
, pg
E

of

q' which
such t h a t

maps

x ( ~ t~ f) r = k o
g

F1

analytical.ly

F i n a l l y , we suppose t h a t f o r any

group of v a l u e s of case f o r

i n the

F1

F 1

W know t h a t t h i s i s t h e e

and, h s n c e , f o r

i51(pm)

Consider t h e polynomial

W claim t h a t e

P(z)

i s i r r e d u c i b l e over

TI

Suppose on t h e c o n t r a r y t h a t where Pl(z) and

T2(z)

P ( z ) = Pl(z)P2(z)

a r e polynomials of p o s i t i v e d e g r e e

with c o e f f i c i e n t s i n

Tl

Since

p(pjL) = O

i t fo1lov;s t h a t

i s a r o o t of e i t h e r
t h e former. Lei Pl(z)

257

P2(z)

A.

Robinson

or

and we may a s s u m

so t h a t

But t h i s i s p o s s i b l e o n l y if f o r some f o r vihich a.

j , 4,

<

4 .

<_ o , -

a&# 0

we have
Y ( aCp W)

v ( a .pjl') =

and s o

( L - j ) p = v ( ~ ' ' ~ ) R ) = v(aj/a4) (t-j)p b e l o n g s t o t h e group of v a l u e s of

T h i s s h o ~ r st h a t

F and i m p l i e s , by one of o u r i n d u c t i v e assumptions t h a t 1 T~ P(a-j)/l

But number d

<

<

so t h e r e e x i s t s a f i n i t e natural. where

such t h a t

d(C-j) = 1 + p q

_p

i.s a g a i n

f i n i t e . . Then

pP = ( p ( C - j ) p ) d ( p - q / L ) p a l s o bol.ongs t o

F 1

which i s c o n t r a r y t o assumption. i r r e d u c i b l e over

F1

Accordingly,

P(z)

must be

.
x E

It follov,s t h a t e v e r y element
unique r e p r e s e n t a t L o n of t h e form

Fl(rp) h a s a

A s b e f o r e , t h e v a l u e s of t h e s e v e r a l t e r m s cn t h e r i g h t hand
s i d e a r e all. d i f f e r c n t so t h a t

.A.

Robinson

T h i s shows t h a t

belongs t o

( and ~c o ) f i r m s t h a t ~ n
Y

- ~ ( ~ s' a t1i s f i e s ~

the

condition t h a t f o r every pV b e l o n g s t o l ( p )

i n t h e group of v a l u e s of

F1(Pp)

Moreover, we may d e f i n e a unique

a n a l y t i c isomorphism, 6 putting

,
and

from

Fl(Pfi)
= t"

onto

F 2 ( t I L ) by

on

I J - - ( ~ ~ )

For l e t

x = Fl(pP)

be g i v e n by 11.7 t h e n t h e s t a t e d c o n d i t i o n s i n d u c e

an a l g z b r a i c isoniorphisn from

-l ( f ) F

onto

F2(tL')

Moreover, v(o-(x)) = m i n ( v ( k ( a j ) ) + jp) = min(v(a.) J s o t h a t t h e isomorphism i s a n a l y t i c . . Repeating t h i s procedure a c o u n t a b l e cumber of t i m e s we f i n a l l y o b t a i n e x t e n - ' l o n ~ F1 a w i t h t h o group cr" v a l u o s f o r any
1

j/d) = v ( h )

of

~ ~ F; and )

of

E2(tm)

H '

which i s pure i n 6'F2 F 1

1

*Z

such t h a t

k E H'

' pk E F 1

,k t
1

and such t h a t t h e r e i s an
F;

a n a l y t i c isomorrhism

7 from
k E H

onto

which s z t i s f i e s

h (p ) - t C k - k
e x t e n s i o n of of

for a l l

Noreover,

P is a proper

and hence, a n e x t e n s i o n of

9.T h i s
R
=K

c o n t r a d i c t s t h e maximality of But

that

r;/

and a h element and shows

El = F1([p k 1 )

where

r a n g e s over

and s o t h e domain of *$ c o i n c i d e s w i t h El k t h e n E2 = F 2 ( { t 1 ) where k r a n g e s o v e r K for all

k E K

- 259 -

A.

Robinson

Let

E2

=y , (El)
( p k ) = tk

--

and

F i n a l l y , we observe t h a t El(a)

i s a l s o t h e group
El(a)

of v a l u e s of t h e f i e l d b e l o n g s a l r e a d y t o some in K(")

s i n c e e v e r y element of

Fin)(a)

and s o i t s v a l u e i s c o n t a i n e d

T h i s completes t h e f i r s t s t a g e of o u r proof. 12. - Proof of 7.2, completed.

s u r v e y o f t h e p r o p e r t F e s of t h e mapping p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n shows t h a t d i f f e r e n c e between

?-/f

A r t i n ' s conSecture, obtained i n t h e

~ t /b e l o n g s

to A. h

The s i g n i f i c a n t

and t h e o r i g i n a l

of which El(a)

i s an

e x t e n s i o n , i s t h a t t h e g r o u p of v a l u e s o f t h e group of v a l u e s of F1(a) set

coincides with

It i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t a l r e a d y Z 1 h a s t h e same group o f v a l u e s a s F1 I n t h a t c a s e , we

El = F1

.
K

W s h a l l a l s o w r i t e , a t o u r convenience, e (0)

.
and pure i n
*

Now

i s coun:able

-Z

Accordingly,

t h e a s s u m p t i o n s of Theorem 10.22 a r e s a t i s f i e d and t h e r e e x i s t s a n a n a l y t i c isomorphiso b(') 3 J / ( o ) from onto Y o ) E2 Passing from so j4(0) 21) to

Ti')

yiO)

d o e s n0.t extend t h e group of v a l u e s ,

a l s o i s a n element o f

A.

to

4'0) a

Next, we a p p l y t h e argument of t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n ,T o , El i n f p l a c e of X, F1, F2, and f o r t h e

sane
E

E Qp

so a s t o obtain a
E;~) 3
Z ~ O ) such

and

T(l) A w i t h domain E
that E!')(a)

h a s t h e Sam?

group of v a l u e s a s

+I1

- 260 -

A.

Robinson

Next, we agai.n u s s 10.22 i n o r d e r t o o ~ ; . z i n ati /v ' w a n a l y t i c iso:iorphisn ( ) ; fro. Z 3. (1-1 o n t o "(1) s2

Ve conLinua i n t h i s way i n d e f i n i t e l y , a l t e r n a t i n g between t h e two modes of e x t e n s i o n . T i i s y i e l d s c h a i n s of f ie!.ds .rLJ .

and o f anal.:rtic

isomorphisri.,~ between them,

where t h e l a t t e r a 1 1 h e l o n g t o -/L. Let

J1 -

- (J , ( n ) =
L1

C)

w
J2 =

TV

() z(") =
2

UEin)

Then

J1

and

J2

a r e a l ~ e b r a i c a l l yc l o s e d i n
/v

respective!.y,

since t h i s i s t r u e of

31n)

and

~1") .
F -

and

R ((t)) P And t h e

grnu? o f v l l u e s of of
E!~),

J 1( a ) i s t h e s a n e a s t h e grou? of v a l u e s

J1

s i n c e t h e corresponding f a c t holds f o r

... .

Finally,

and r a n g e

J2

El( 0 )

, -(I-) , 4
J1

i s an element ~f
then

If

a E J1

=6
.

with doaain

satisfies the

cond.itions cf 5.3. e f f e c t i v e l y a t some

I n t h a t c a s e , t h e above c h a i n s t e r n i n a t e
n

.
Zl

Su~nose a

J1

Since

Jl(a)

i s an

i n m e d i a t e e.utens5.o~ f o sequence c in J1
9

t h e r e e x i s t s a pseudo-convergsnt a a s pseudo-limit b u t w?tkout J1

J1

with Since

pseudo 3.ir;iit i n closed jn by 10.23.

is algebraically

P,
Let

!$I
a'

n u s t be o f t r a n s c e n d e n t a l . t y y e , be a c s e d o - l i n i t of

ib(ep)] ,

so

that a
1

261

from Jl(a)

A.

Robinson

E R D ( ( t) )

- J2 .

Then 10.9

an a n a l y t i c a l i s o m o r p h i n

h3

shows t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s onto ~ ~ () a '

h '

i s a g a i n a n element; of -/Land i t s a t i s f i e s th-. c o n d i t i o n

Interchanging t h e r o l e s of This

5.3 (t?rit!-ia d i f f e r e n t n o t a t i o n ) .
and
Q~

Rp((t))

we s e e t h a t 5.4 a l s o i s s a t i s f i e d .

c o n p l e t e s t h e proof of 7.2. W s h a l l say t h a t a f i e l d e tion -f o r a and degree given integer d,

F

s a t i s f i e s A r t i n ' s ccndin variables

d >_ 1 i f e v e r y form of

with c o e f f i c i e n t s i n

a non-trivial zero provided n > d 2

= 0) in j It i s e a s y t o s e e t h a t , f o r g i v e n

..., 5

, f(xl,
5

..., xn)

(n'ot a l l

, has F , d , this

i s e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e c o n d i t i o n t h a t e v e r y form of
v a r i a b l e s with c o e f f i c i e n t s i n
F

n = d 2 -I- 1

have a n o n - t r i v i a l z e r o j.n f(xl,

For i f t h e o r i g i n a ! form i s

t h e n we can r e d u c e it t o a form by s e t t i n g
g

g(xl,

n = 0 , and any n o n - t r i v i a l z e r o of w i l l y i e l d a n o n - t r i v i a l z e r o of f It i s t h e n a l s o e a s y xwl

X

... --

..., x,) ..., xm)

.

with with

>

m =d

d2 2

+1 +1

t o s e e t h a t f o r any g i v s n by a s e n t e n c a
Xd

A r t i n t s c o n d i t i o n can be e x p r e s s e d

of t h e Lower P r e d i c a t e C a l c u l u s i n t e r n s

o f t h e r e l a t i o n s of e q ~ a l i t y ,a d d i t i o n , and m u l t i p l i c a t i o n .

It was proved by S. Lang ( r e f . 11) t h a t i f

f i n i t a f i e l d then positive intezers quence of 7.1, 12.1. d Theore:n - (Ax-Kochen).

F i s any

F ( ( t ) ) sa.tisfies Artin's c o n d i t i ~ n o r a l l f d

Fence, we have a s an immediate cons$-

For any p o s i t i v e i n t e g e r po = p,(d) such t h a t f o r

, there

e x i s t s a posS.tive i n t e g e r

A.

Robinson

any prime

>

po

, the

f i e l d of p-adic numbers

dp

satisiles

Artin's condition.

It had been c o n j e c t u r e d p r e v i o u s l y by A r t i n t h a t Qp
s a t i s f i e s t h e c o n d i t i o n w i t h o u t any r e s t r i c t i o n on
p

However, t h e r e a r e counter-examples which show t h a t t h i s i s not t h e case.

A.

Robinson

BIBLIOGRAPHY

No.

Author

- t l e , etc, Ti

1.

J. Ax and
S. Kochen

Diophantine problems o v e r l o c a l f i e l d s ,

I , 11, American J o u r n a l of Mathematics,

v o l . $7, 1365, pp. 605-630, 631-648.

2.

Diophantine problems over l o c a l f i e l d s : 111, Decidable f i e l d s , Annals of I k t h e m a t i c s , v o l . 83, 1366, pp. 437-456.

3.

Paul J. Cohen

Decision procedures f o r r e a l and p-adic f i e l d s , S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y , 1967 (mimeographed)

.
I1

4.

R. J.

~rii.sse'

Sur quelques c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s d e s r e l a t i o n s b a s d e s s u r d e s isomorphisnes r e s t r e i n t s , I. Etude gdn&ale.

/

A p p l i c a t i o n s aux r e l a t i o n s di;rdre, Algers-IvIathematiques, v o l . 2, 1955, pp. 16-60, 2'73-295. 5. T. Frayne, D. C. .':orel, and D. S. S c c t t Reduced d i r e c t p r o d u c t s , Fundaxenta EIathernaticae, v o l . 51, 1962, pp. 195227.

6.

L. Henkin

Completeness i n t h e t h e o r y o f t y p e s ,

dournal of Symbolic Logic, v o l . 1 5 ,

1950, pp. 61-91.

7.

I. Kaplansky

Maximal f i e l d s w i t h v a l u a t i o n s , Duke I;lathematical J o u r n a l , v o l . 9, 1942,

No. -

264

A.

Robinson

8.

If.

Author J. y e i s l e r

T i t l e , etc. U l t r a p r o d u c t s and Elementary c l a s s e s , Proceeding of t h e Royal Acadeciy of S c i e n c e s , Amsterdad, ser.J., 1962, pp. 477-495. vol. 64,

9.

S. Kochen

U l t r a p r o d u c t s i n t h e t h e o r y of models, Annals o f Mathematics, s e r . 2, v o l . 79, 1961, pp. 221-261.

10. G. K r e i s e l and

~ l i m e n t s Logique Ftathematique , de ~ h l o r i e e s L ~ o d ~ l e s ,a r i s , 1367 d P O q u a ~ i ~ a l g e b r a icc o s u r e , Annals n l of Mathematics, s e r . 2 , vol. 55, 1952, pp. 373-390-

J. L. K r i v i n e 1 . S. Lang 1

Quelques rsmarquzs, theoremes, e t probl$mes s u r l e s c l a s s e s de'finiz ; a b l e s d * a ~ . ~ \ e b r eMathematical I n t e r p r e t a t i o n s, of Formal Systems, Amsterdam 1955, pp. 98-113. Untersuchungen a u s den G e b i e t e d e r Ffathematlschen Logik, :Iatematic:?eskii Sbornik, v o l . 1 ( 4 3 ) , 1936, pp. 323-335.

On a g e n e r a l nethod f o r o b t a i n i n g
l o c a l theorems i n group t h e o r y , N o t i c e s of t h e Pedagogical I n s t i t u t e o f Ivancvo , Physical-IJathematical S c i e n c e s , vol.. 1, pp. 3-9 ( i n R u s s i a n ) .

265

A.

Robinson

No.

Author A. Kosto~vski

T i t l e , etc. O models of a x i o m a t i c systems, n

15.

Fundaments hIathematicae, v o l . 39, 1952,

pp. 133-157.

16.
17.

A. Robinson

Complete T h e o r i e s , Amsterdam, 1956. I n t r o d u c t i o n t o Model Theory and

t o t h e Metamathematics of ~ l ~ e b r a ,
Amsterdam 1363. Non-standard A n a l y s i s , Amsterdam, 1966. Non-standard Theory of Dedekind r i n g s , Proceedings of t h e Royal Academy of S c i e n c e s , Amstsrdam, s e r . A , v o l . 70, 1967, pp. 444-452. 20.
A. T a r s k i

Some n o t i o n s on t h e b o r d e r l i n e of a l g e b r a and ?uletanathematics, Proceedings o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Congress of Mathematicians (Cambridge, U.S.A., 1950) 1952, vol. 1, pp. 705-720. Contri.butions t o t h e t h e o r y of n o d e l s , Proceedings of t h e Royal Acadeiny of S c i e n c e s , Amsterdam, s e r . A., v o l . 57, pp. 572-581,582-588, pp. 56-64. v o l . 58,

22.

Y. L. Yershov

O t h e elementary t h e o r y of l o c a l n f i e l d s , Algebra i Logika, v o l . 4 ,

fast, 2 , 1965, pp. 5-30 ( i n Russian).

A . Robinson

No. -

Author

T i t l e , etc. O t h e elementary t h s o r y of maximal n normal f i e l d s , Algebra i Logilta, v o l . 4, f c s c . 3 , 1965, pp. 31-70.

23

P. I,. Yershov

C E N T R O INTERNAZIONALE MATEMATICO ESTIVO (C. I. M. E.

SOCHOR Antonin-BALCAR B o h u s l a v

T H E G E N E R A L THEORY O F SEMISETS. SYNTACTIC MODELS O F T H E S E T THEORY.

C o r s o t e n u t o a V a r e n n a ( C o m o ) dal 9 - 1 7 S e t t e m b r e 1968

THE GENERAL THEORY O F SEMISETS. SYNTACTIC MODELS OF THE SET THEORY. Bohuslav B a l c a r , Antonh Sochor (Prague) It is the purpose of this a r t i c l e to explain briefly s o m e concepts and methods, especially s o called the theory of s e m i t e s , which a r e studied in P r a g u e s e m i n a r . The authors of the theory of s e m i s e t s a r e P. vopgnka and P. ~ a / j e k .We present h e r e s o m e r e s u l t s (not in the most general f o r m )

that a r e contained in their book "Sets, Semisets, ModelsH (to be published) with t h e i r kind permission. This a r t i c l e was written a s m a t e r i a l to our l e c t u r e that was held in the Summer Institute in Varenna (Italy) and contains no o u r new r e s u l t s . At f i r s t we give the following illustration in o r d e r t o a c q u i r e s o m e idea about s e m i s e t s . The r e a d e r i s already acquainted with the G6 el-

- B e r n a y s l s e t theory (GB) from the lecture of prof. Mostowski (in what follows we s h a l l denote this l e c t u r e class by

LM])

where a l s o the universal

and the c l a s s f

of all

constructible s e t s were defined.

Let us limit our attention only to c l a s s e s that a r e s u b c l a s s e s of

f.

Then we have t h r e e kinds of objects : lo 2 ' 3 ' Subclasses of Subsets of

; ;

Constructible s e t s (elements of

).

F r o m point of view of the c l a s s

f .

the objects of the second kind a r e espe-

cially interesting. They have the following property

(YiS ~ 1 1 oL1I.r. c yl. 3~

Roughly speaking, from the point of view of the c l a s s that a r e s u b c l a s s e s of s e t s (constructible s e t s ) .

they a r e c l a s s e s

The theory of s e m i s e t s is a general theory which d e s c r i b e s the situation introduced above. The objects of seoond kind correspond to s e m i s e t s . The theory of s e m i s e t s i s weaker then the s e t theory GB

It

i s not

B a l c a r and Sochor

only an interesting mathematical theory, but moreover, it gives

a rich

apparatus f o r the study of the s e t theory (models of the s e t theory). The theory of s e m i s e t s is studied f r o m both a s p e c t s in the monografie of P. voprnka and P. Hgjek.

1. Syntactic model (interpretation). Our metamathematical conception i s finitary. We u s e the f i r s t - o r d e r predicate calculus with equality. Logical axioms, deduction r u l e s , concepts of proof and provability a r e usual. An axiomatic theory i s a finite The s e n -

sequence of formulas, which a r e called axioms of this theory. tence

"
y

i s a formula of the theory

9 " means,

that a l l nonlogical

symbols occurring in mula (i..

o c c u r in s o m e axioms of

r. The
9-is

fact that a f o r -

of r i s provable in the theory r-provable).

i s denoted by

r k f)
consistent.

y is

The symbol Cons Metadefinition.

(nmeans that the theory

be t h e o r i e s .

Let r a n d

mappingdof formu-

l a s of the theory T i n t o f o r m u l a s of the theory of in lo

i s a syntactic model

iff r e s p e c t s both logical axioms and the axioms of

9-;

it means that formulas. 2 '

maps these axioms into

-provable

, respects & i f y and

deduction rules: are r - f o r m u l a s , then

cUdenotes

the image of the formula

in t h e mapping

A).

B a l c a r and Sochor 3 O ,&respects the negation :

The followin2 principles a r e demonstrable. Provability principle. Let then the image of every

, be &

a syntactic model

7 in 2
one

,
;

r - p r o v a b l e formula i s

Y -provable

Consistency principle. Cons

2.

1 f T h a s a model in Cons

then

(9)

Axioms for s e m i s e t s .

We shall describe axioms of the s e t theory and the theory of s e m i sets. The only nonlogical symbol i s the binary predicate symbol be c l a s s e s .

We

suppose that the all individuals will by capital Latin letters.

Variables a r e denoted

(there a r e s o m e c l a s s e s )

(the extensionality axiom) Definition of s e t s : A class is a set if

/y (X)

( 3 Y ) ( X c Y)

it i s a m e m b e r of s o m e c l a s s . The axiom one s e t .

F 1

a s s e r t s that t h e r e i s at l e a s t
y,

z ,

. . .,

a s special , r e s t r i c t e d variables f o r s e t s .

We introduce s m a l l l e t t e r s w

A 1

( v & , y ) ( 3 z )( ) L u ) ( u b z

v u =y)

(the axiom of unordered p a i r )

B a l c a r and Sochor

As a consequence of the axiom <w y> of s e t s w,y

we can define t h e o r d e r e d p a i r <W

and in g e n e r a l
+a

mathematical natural number stence of c l a s s e s .

(

. . .,w n >

for

each m e t a -

The following a x i o m s c o n c e r n the exi-

2) (

If&)

2)

(the existence of the c l a s s of a!'

s e t s -the u n i v e r s a l c l a s s ) uev

fx)(32)( .b'&)(;r;i z
(the c l a s s
7,

(3 v)(;v;=<uV> 8 u,

drx)

i s called the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of

c on

X)

( V X , Y ) ( ~ Z ) ( # A ) U & *Z .y ~ . ~ : ~ ~ ~ b )
(the axiom of d i f f e r e n c e )

f x ) ( 3 ~@( ) ( d e e ( 3Y)(<Y > 6 )a 2

(the axiom of domain)

( f x , ~ ) ( j z ) ( J x ) J & a z (3u,v)(,~=<uv> = (the axiom of r e s t r i c t i o n )

i~

& rcrxJ

Axioms

B6 and

B7

a r e the a x i o m s

of c o n v e r s e .

It follows immediately f r o m the extensionality axiom that in each of t h e s e seven c a s e s t h e c l a s s can introduce

i s determined uliiquely

by

and

. We

one constant

f o r the universal c l a s s and define seven pair,

following operations:

unordered

- r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , difference, domain, QEdelian

r e s t r i c t i o n and two c o n v e r s e s . Those operations a r e called

Balcar and Sochor

operations and a r e denoted

by

rl.. . , F7 .
/3

T C. of the c l a s s axiom (repre-

A theory with axioms described above i s called the theory of c l a s s e s Note that every axiom of group scheme (see is a special c a s e

LM]

. On

the other hand the c l a s s axiom scheme T C

senting infinitely many a x i o m s ) many axioms in the theory

i s already demonstrable from finitely

.
T C i s consistent.

One can prove that the theory Definition (TC). A class is Sm (X)

(Iy)(xsy).

a s e m i s e t if it i s a subclass of a s e t . Greek l e t t e r s

We shall sometimes use small a s restricted variables f o r s e m i s e t s . Lemma

(

6, y

, 21,

.. .

T C)

(1)

Every s e t i s a s e m i s e t . Every p a r t of a s e m i s e t i s a semiset. The intersection of a c l a s s and a s e m i s e t (specially s e t ) i s a semiset.

(2)

(3)

Relations and some their properties will play an important role below. If

i s a relation, then

&(R),

P ( R ) , f(R)

denote domain,

range, field of the relation Definition (TC)

R, respectively. be a relation

. Let

.
)

Reg (R) % (Yrc;iB(~))

( R
NOC

. (Rt' af %

.
1
)
=

i s regular;
(4) =_(

r ~ l lf d ~ =.{y;

<Y X , a R
= R " {yf

l d ~Y, ~ ( R ) ) ( R " @J

+a

Y)

(R

i s nowhere constant)

A relation exact functor An semisets R which i s r e g u l a r

( Exct ( R ) )

274

B a l c a r and Sochor an

and nowhere constant i s called

.
"mapping" of

exact functor may be considered a s one-to-one to s e t s .

Axioms of the group

c
C

( J ~ ) [ ~ ~ ~ O & S ( Y ~ .. I ~ ) ( ~ Z ~ ~ ) (
(the axiom of infinity) FL&(R)
4

& /@(R))r
a r e semisets.

&/v./R~

In virtue of this

axioms one: can prove that the power c l a s s of a s e m i s e t a semiset X)

and the s u m c l a s s of

1M

The axiom of regularity f o r s e t s :

The theory theory

TS = TC + C 1 + C 2 + C 3

+D

is

called the s e t

.
TS i s provable the axiom of regularity for classes, i.e.

In the theory

The axiom

C 2

i s a modification of the axiom of substitution ( s e e TS and

[MI).

Hence the theories

GB

a r e equivalent.

111

TS

we can prove that every i.e.

(

Godelian operation i = 1,

"makes

sets

from s e t s f f ,

fl&, ) n ( Fi(&) . F o r y y)
A
1,

this is a trivial

consequence of the

axiom

hence it i s already provable in

TC

B a l c a r and Sochor

Denote the f o r m u l a s The theory

+gly)

f l ( F i ( & , Y))

for

i = 2,

.. .,

by ( Ail.

is c a l l e d t h e t h e o r y of s e m i s e t s .
F r o m p r e v i o u s l y m e n t i o n e d it f o l l o w s t h a t than TSS . TS is t h e s t r o n g e r theory

A
to a set

f o r m u l a is c a l l e d r e s t r i c t e d if e v e r y q u a n t i f i e r i s

restricted

.
(Restricted comprehension scheme formula with

Metatheorem

[RCS]

Let y b e a restricted Then Using sum

only s e t v a r i a b l e s . x c a

TSSk( f a ) ( 3 b ) ( f & ) ( & a b r

& y ( * , - - - ) ).
the power class and the

CRCS]
class of
A

one can show a set

that

in

TSS

are sets.

Definition. ction of

class with

is

called r e a l

( Real
;

(X))

if t h e i n t e r s e -

an arbitrary set is a set

Let

TSS* b e t h e t h e o r y

TSS

DI ,

where

D l is a a x i o m

Metatheorem. t h e n in t h e t h e o r y

is a ~ 6 d e l i a no p e r a t i o n ( i = 2 , . . . , 7 ) If f i(X,v TSS* i:, p r o v a b l e :

B a l c a r and Sochor

3 Syntactic m o d e l s of t h e s e t t h e o r y .

O u r m a i n a i m i s t o investigate m o d e l s of t h e s e t t h e o r y we s h a l l s e e , t h e r e a r e two w a y s of c o n s t r u c t i n g *models s o m e additional axioms): and "going a b o v e n , i . e . Let R R fine f o r e a c h f o r m u l a a formulas (R) "going belowH, i. e . to make sets from semisets. TSS @R) by then R which d o e s not
TS

What is TSS (with

t h e r o l e of t h e t h e o r y of s e m i s e t s in t h e investigation of s u c h m o d e l s ? A s in ommitting s o m e proper c l a s s e s ,

b e a v a r i a b l e o r a c o n s t a n t f o r nonempty r e l a t i o n s . We de-

y of
and

contain t h e

symbol

called the semiset interpretation and

,

t h e s e t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of
lo

y
Y

respectively.

If +R)

= Y G C(R) @
s

(Iy r Y)
8( f

(X = R"

( y/

and

T(R)

4 Rea4(Y)

, where
r. e C(R)) (

?eatR(Y)

= (Y sC(R))
8

3y E

C(R))

( R ~ ~ { W )n If

~ " { )~. f

P=Pl

cy2

y , ~ y t, e n h
and

If

Y P ( ~ X ) ~the:? , y'R)s(3~ s~(R))

'y (R)

and (R) )

T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r e t h o s e given by s o c a l l e d model r e lations.

B a l c a r and Sochor

Definition

(TSS) iff

A nonempty relation

i s called a model relation

HP/ (R)

(R i s extensional)

(R

i s almost universal)

3O
4 O 5O
6O

Ii R R

is regular i s closed; it means that i s relatively infinite,

( A ~ ) ( ~holds for )

i=l,.. ,7

it means that

( C I ) ( ~ )holds.

( D ) ( ~ )holds. Metatheorem. . Let R be a constant. If in TSS k TSS

/YP~(R)then

the

semiset

interpretation by

i s a model

TSS

the s e t interpretation by

i s a model

TS in

* TSS .
of

Moreover,

In the f i r s t c a s e c l a s s e s of the model R and of the model

a r e all

s u b c l a s s e s of the field of

in the second one only s o m e s u b c l a s s e s

e ( ~r e) c l a s s e s a
Y
in s e n s e of

Elements of the field of R a r e codes of s e t s of the model and by R (X belongs to

the membership i s determined model iff the code of

belongs to

Y )

Examples. called TSS

The c l a s s by

E = {<x y> ; x e

. 3

i s the model relation. TS in TSS* is

The s e t interpretation the r e a l model. so we have

E which

i s the model of TS

Since the theory

is stronger

that the theory

Cons (TSS*)

iff

Cons (TS )

B a l c a r and Sochor

We can t a k e the relation

EnP

f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c a s e of a model,

where

is a s o called model c l a s s ( &/(P))

. We

s h a l l define t h i s notion

only in TS

.
class

Definition (TS). A lo 2 ' P P

P
i. e .

is

model

c l a s s (&/(P))

iff

i s transitive,

()LX)(d P - + & SSP) e

i s closed with r e s p e c t to Gvdelian operations,

t P)

i. e .

(f&,Y e p ) ( F i ( . t ' y ) 3' P

i = 1,

...,

i s a l m o s t universal,

i. e .

Theorem ---

(TS)

/ Y c t ( ~-r/Yrj(E )

n P)
in TS or TSS* o r in

Hence f o r t h e construction of models of TS stronger theories

it suffices t o prove the existence of v a r i o u s model r e -

latiorls o r specially model c l a s s e s . On the o t h e r hand, t h e mathematical theor y of model r e l a t i o n s and model c l a s s e s may be developed within the s e t theory o r classes a s the theory of s e m i s e t s . We can study the s t r u c t u r e of model interesting s e t theoretical objects without speaking about me-

tamathematical problems. Now we s h a l l give one example of a model c l a s s in TS. Let

-C

be the c l o s u r e operation with r e s p e c t to seven It means, that 1 [foS(w)

7
( t/u, v

Godelian operations y such

defined on s e t s . w c,y Let

i s the s m a l l e s t s e t

and f o r e v e r y

.. .,

e y ) ( F i ( u , v),~y) holds.

r, ,

daOn HEF

be a s e t s defined which

in

JM]

We s h a l l define the c l a s s

E F and

a r e called the c l a s s of effective s e t s and the c l a s s respectively. One can prove that E F and

of h e r e d i t a r i l y effective s e t s , HEF a r e equal

t o the c l a s s e s of ordinal definable s e t s and to the c l a s s of

279

Balcar and Sochor (See J. Myhil, D. S c ~ t t : Ordinal

hereditarily definable s e t s , respectively.

definability (memeographed). In this paper a r e a l s o historical notices). EF

=

UC/0s(fLf)
where&l(x)

; =

HEF =

[ J unr(x) ~
u U & (i U w U

EF]

{x)u&

.. .

Theorem

(TS)

/YCf

(HEF). (AC) i s the following:

The c l a s s axiom of choice

T h e r e i s a one t o one mapping of the c l a s s Metatheorem. of TS+AC in TS The s e t interpretation by

Ot r
HEF

onto

V ,

is

the model

.
--/dar(~S

Corollary.

Corr,(TS)

+ AC)

The ~ollowinggeneralization of the usual ultraproduct relations ( s e e prof. Robinson's l e c t u r e ) i s due to vopknka. Boolean algebra.. An wrb i s called a partion of Let
b

b iff

be a complete lo

VtZ = 1b '

P a r t (b) i s the s e t all partions of Definition (TS + AC) -

b. be an ultrafilter on complete Boolean

. Let

algebra. W e define the ultrapower c l a s s and ultrapower relation a s follows:

t/lr, /d,r)is
ld
(ff6

r not generally extensional.

In

TS+AC we can prove that that u

s
f

t h e r e i s a relation

C / ~ * C(b,%)gC/.r ( b , t ) t / l ~ ( b z ) ) ( 3 g a . d / f ~ + ( bz))(V { , ,
i s provable, where

such u
A

f l ~ / ( Z / ~ rz+)k )
D(f) v e D(g)@f(u)=

v;

i f e z!

L'lcc//,a)

v / V f p C / / L / I)).

I3alcar and Sochor

4. Axiom of a support

In the previous p a r t we described the model of r e a l model) omitted. problem, than

TS

in

TSS

* (the

In this construction a l l s e m i s e t s which w e r e not s e t s

were

Now we want whether i s it

to deal with a v e r y important and quite different possible to construct a model of TS "greater" and e v e r y

a given model of

TSS*.

l l G r e a t e r " means that e v e r y s e t

s e m i s e t will be a s e t in the new model. To be able to solve this problem we shall introduce the following axioms :

tCx)(&(x) & x +O

( ~ Y ) ( Y C X & ~ ~ ~ = O )

(axiom of regularity for s e m i s e t s )

(all s e m i s e t s a r e coded by all s e t s ; we can consider for which

X = Rndyf Theorem mapping (TSS*+ S 1 + S2) H: V 4 &(R)

asacodeof

X)
R and a

T h e r e i s a model relation such that

The meaning of this theorem i s that construct every (using the model relation R) a set ( m e m b e r of

in

TSS*+

S1 TS

+ S2

we can

the model of

such that

s e t becomes

H1!V) and e v e r y s e m i s e t becomes hand every subset of HuV c o r -

a s e t (subset of

HITV)

and on the other in the theory

responds

to s o m e s e m i s e t

. Therefore

the universal c l a s s

of the theory T S S ' + S ~ + S ~can be imagined a s model c l a s s in the model of

Balcar and Sochor

TS ,

the power c l a s s of this model

class

in the s e n s e of the model in

question being described by the collection

of all s e m i s e t s .
S2;

Now we shall give an axiom which i s s t r o n g e r that the axiom of a support. Definition. Let

it w > l l be

Z, X

a r e s e m i s e t s , we define Z

Dep (X, Z) s ( 3 r ) ( x = r u z )

and say that SUPP(Z) Definition.

X depends on
( tLx) (

.
(x, z ) )

(x)j Pep

Axiom of a support:

J U ~ P ( 3~ ) ( $ u p l c ( ~ ) ) . s
Z
Z such that every by s o m e

T h i s axiom s a y s that t h e r e i s a s e m i s e t other s e m i s e t Theorem can be obtained a s the image of

set

relation

TSS*

AC

+ S1 +5*p,k~2
X can such that X = r NZ

We can prove this theorem using fact, that every s e m i s e t be "codedu by s o m e s e t relatioil

We shall introthe axiom of

duce an axiom of a Boolean support which i s s t r o n g e r than a support. Definition. miset

Z

Let

be a complete Boolean algebra (b

is a

set). A seb
if

#b ,

Zc_b

i s a set-multiplicative ultrafilter on

It must be emphasized that in the third condition Definition.

is a set

BLpp (h,

Z)

, (z) $4pP

and

B a l c a r and Sochor

Z algebra

i s a s e t multiplicative u l t r a f i l t e r b

on the complete Boolean

Axiom of a Boolean support.

> p s (3b ) ( 3 Z) &p

9G/"(b,

Z,

T h e o r e m (TSS*) A semiset

Let

be a complete Boolean a l g e b r a . i s a set-multiplicative u l t r a f i l t e r on b iff

Z f b,

ZEb

Theorem (TSS* )

3 x ~ p ps a
Let If
(

r-fl
be s e t f o r m u l a s (i. e.
[( f b ) (

Metatheorem. is a set variable) Boolean a l g e b r a

y(b), w TS

every variables i s a complete

. &

+ AC + w /-

p (b)
w

--f

b)

(b)] then the formula TSS*+

( 3 ) ( 3 2) ( (r (b) 6 b
.
CA,

& >,fwpp(b,

Z))

i s consistent with

The meaning of t h i s m e t a t h e o r e m i s following. Suppose we have des c r i b e d s o m e complete Boolean algebra using s o m e s e t formula

Then we can suppose that t h e r e i s a set-multiplicative u l t r a f i l t e r on it which is a support. The proof can be done using the u l t r a p o w e r . plete Boolean a l g e b r a such that it Put
( z i s a s e t ) . L e t us construct

Let

be a

com-

(b) , z

b e an a r b i t r a r y u l t r a f i l t e r on

(c)
It

b holds.

[< b
Let

lb

>)

,Z

the ultrapower o v e r t h i s u l t r a f i l t e r .

b=&+ (b, z ) I 1 Z =

l kbJ
v

Then in s e n s e of ultrapower f(0) ALI;

us define that

f1

i s e a s y to s e e

is a ultrafilter

on

urblez

3 .
of

i n the s e n s e

ultraproduct.

Suppose we have s o m e partition in the s e n s e f

of ultraproduct;

t h i s m e a n s that we have a function a partition of b. L e t us define g( Z and that g

s u c h that e v e r y value of it i s
A

= k v ,u
gef

>;

v 6 f(u) @ u e D ( f )

. .

It i s evident that

holds in s e n s e of

ultrapower

Balcar and Sochor

Now w e h a v e o n l y t o p r o v e t h a t w e c a n s u p p o s e

Z t o b e a s u p p o r t . But i f w e Z
in t h e s e n s e of

c o n s i d e r only s e m i s e t s which a r e s e t - i m a g e s of u l t r a p o w e r we o b t a i n a m o d e l support. of TSS

in w h i c h

is

a Boolean

5.

Example demonstrate Suppose

=,I* ,

Now w e s h a l l

(TS) +&(Ts

+ 2%
t = {f.

u s i n g p r e v i o ~ st h e o r e m s .
=

L = V

and define

&fT(f)

i01J;
t

{ fif(n.r ) = I )
,
let b

( n.e w,, d c

y8) .

D(f) = Let

i s t h e topology o n

d e t e r m i n e d by t h e s u b b a s e of a l l

use

(*(5@.,
algebra

dt W. ,,

be the

complete Boolean Now u s i n g a

of a l l r e g u l a r

o p e n s u b s e t s of

this topological space.

o n e of p r e v i o u s l v

mentioned on

t h e o r e m s we can b

suppose that t h e r e i s

set-multiplicative ultrafilter distinct is at

We s h a l l of r,

prove, that t h e r e a r e H e A s c a d h = Nfa t h e r e subset of u0x b . subclas-

s e m i s e t s which a r e s u b c l a s s e s distinct set

$ & ,

c ~ d.
r

most

relations

being

Therefore there i s a t most ses of

W,

distinct

s e m i s e t s which

are

Define

a
= A una

{<

>, n

U 0

1.

Evidently Z).

r" Z

we.et L
(una
A

2Z

g. Z
)

, r~ f 8
A-u
)

Then.' (

)L n ) ( u n z Z s u n &
,me W,

Therefore therefore

)v(-unA

w = A[(un4

nA (-un6

eZ

for every

and

A -u ng)

n&W,/~Z
W # 0

b e c a u s e t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n i s done therefore there

u
"4%

o v e r the s e t

u0.

Then

and

are

4 ,dl, . . , ..
(w

5,

dk

such that from

But if

no

i s different

y,... 34,

the formula

B a l c a r and Sochor

is not semiset TSS

t r u e , which i s a contradiction.

Then

t h e r e i s exactly

+"

d~stincl

s u b c l a s s e s of

.
TS

Now it suffices to and in such

extend this model of

+ > k t 0 a model of

a model

. <& holds ? , 4
numbers a r e abreader has

(of c o u r s e we have m o r e o v e r to recognize that c a r d i n a l s solute, but noticed it i s a $onsequence of p r o p e r t i e s of b)

The

that using previous t h e o r e m s t o solve this problem we had only

choose s o m e suitable (.omplete Boolean a l g e b r a .

~ a l c a and Sochor r

K. GODEL

T h e consistency of t h e a x i o m Press, 1940.

of choice,

Princeton

Univ.

P. J. COHEN

T h e independence

of the continuum hypothesis 50(1963), 51(1964)

I, I1

, Proc.

N a t . Acad. Sci. US-4,