Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T04:23:04.947Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Lω1ω is enough: a reduction theorem for some infinitary languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Gonzalo E. Reyes*
Affiliation:
Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Extract

In this paper we deal with infinitary languages which allow arbitrary infinite disjunctions and conjunctions, but finite strings of quantifiers only. Furthermore, we shall assume that the primitive predicate symbols are finitary. (Cf. [K] and §2 for further information and unexplained notations.)

Our main result shows that every “reasonable” language of this type is, in a certain sense, reducible to one of the same type which allows countable disjunctions and conjunctions only. More precisely if we let θ be the first measurable cardinal and μθ, we have the following result partially announced in [R1]:

Theorem. Every theory in a Lμω language is equivalent to some theory in a Lω1ω language in the sense that atomic formulas of one language can be mapped into formulas of the other in such a way that, for every set, these maps establish a bijective correspondence between their models having that set as a universe.

The paper is divided into three sections. In the first, we derive the main result from a theorem of Sikorski on ω-homomorphisms of μ-complete boolean algebras. In the second, we give a refined version of Sikorski's theorem from which cardinality bounds can be given for the Lω1ω theories obtained by our reduction. In the last, we use a Skolem ultrapower construction to give examples for which these bounds are actually attained. As a corollary, we obtain the converse of our main result.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1972

Access options

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

References

REFERENCES

[A]Addison, J. W., Henkin, L. and Tarski, A., Theory of models, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965.Google Scholar
[C]Comfort, W., A survey of cardinal invariants, General topology and its applications, vol. 1 (1971), pp. 163169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[J]Joyal, A., Polyadic spaces and elementary theories, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 18 (1971), p. 563. Abstract 71T-E29.Google Scholar
[K]Karp, C., Languages with expressions of infinite length, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1964.Google Scholar
[R1]Reyes, G. E., Lω1ω is enough, Notices of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 18 (1971), p. 823. Abstract 71T-E70.Google Scholar
[R2]Reyes, G. E., Eléments de logique algébrique (in preparation).Google Scholar
[S]Sikorski, R., Boolean algebras, Academic Press, New York, 1964.Google Scholar
[FR]Fleischer, I. and Reyes, G. E., A travers la dimension zéro (to appear).Google Scholar