Why does the compactness theorem not apply to infinite languages?
$begingroup$
I am trying to show that compactness doesn't apply to infinite languages like $L_{omega_1,omega}$ that allow infinite FOL sentences like $forall x, bigvee_{nin omega} x approx S^n(0)$, i.e. $forall x, (x approx 0 vee x approx S(0) vee xapprox S(S(0)) dots)$.
I already picked a language $L=(0,S)$, gave an example of a set of sentences which is satisfiable, since every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_ncolon xapprox 0 vee dots vee sapprox S^n(0)$, has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$.
I am trying to show that nonetheless $Gamma_n$ has no model. I can't get my head around how to perform this last step. Maybe my example of a set of sentences $Gamma_n$ which is supposed to be finitely satisfiable but not satisfiable is not the right one?
model-theory
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to show that compactness doesn't apply to infinite languages like $L_{omega_1,omega}$ that allow infinite FOL sentences like $forall x, bigvee_{nin omega} x approx S^n(0)$, i.e. $forall x, (x approx 0 vee x approx S(0) vee xapprox S(S(0)) dots)$.
I already picked a language $L=(0,S)$, gave an example of a set of sentences which is satisfiable, since every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_ncolon xapprox 0 vee dots vee sapprox S^n(0)$, has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$.
I am trying to show that nonetheless $Gamma_n$ has no model. I can't get my head around how to perform this last step. Maybe my example of a set of sentences $Gamma_n$ which is supposed to be finitely satisfiable but not satisfiable is not the right one?
model-theory
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I am trying to show that compactness doesn't apply to infinite languages like $L_{omega_1,omega}$ that allow infinite FOL sentences like $forall x, bigvee_{nin omega} x approx S^n(0)$, i.e. $forall x, (x approx 0 vee x approx S(0) vee xapprox S(S(0)) dots)$.
I already picked a language $L=(0,S)$, gave an example of a set of sentences which is satisfiable, since every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_ncolon xapprox 0 vee dots vee sapprox S^n(0)$, has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$.
I am trying to show that nonetheless $Gamma_n$ has no model. I can't get my head around how to perform this last step. Maybe my example of a set of sentences $Gamma_n$ which is supposed to be finitely satisfiable but not satisfiable is not the right one?
model-theory
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
$endgroup$
I am trying to show that compactness doesn't apply to infinite languages like $L_{omega_1,omega}$ that allow infinite FOL sentences like $forall x, bigvee_{nin omega} x approx S^n(0)$, i.e. $forall x, (x approx 0 vee x approx S(0) vee xapprox S(S(0)) dots)$.
I already picked a language $L=(0,S)$, gave an example of a set of sentences which is satisfiable, since every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_ncolon xapprox 0 vee dots vee sapprox S^n(0)$, has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$.
I am trying to show that nonetheless $Gamma_n$ has no model. I can't get my head around how to perform this last step. Maybe my example of a set of sentences $Gamma_n$ which is supposed to be finitely satisfiable but not satisfiable is not the right one?
model-theory
model-theory
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
edited Jan 9 at 15:20
Alex Kruckman
27.4k32657
27.4k32657
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
asked Jan 8 at 19:46
JanikG.JanikG.
62
62
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Actually, you don't need any signature: $L={=}$ is completely fine.
Note that you can express the property for any $nin mathbb{N}$ that the model contains at least $n$ different elements. In fact, there is a finite first-order formula that expresses this. Let $phi_n$ be such a formula.
(E.g., $phi_3$ is $exists x_1,x_2,x_3 ,, x_1neq x_2 wedge x_2neq x_3 wedge x_1neq x_3$.)
The theory $T$ now consists of
$bullet$ all the $phi_n$,
$bullet$ and the formula that says that one of the $phi_n$ must be false (this is an infinite disjunction of all the negations of the $phi_n$)
Altogether, this means that the model is infinite and finite (contradiction).
But any finite subsystem is satisfiable (by some finite set).
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3066636%2fwhy-does-the-compactness-theorem-not-apply-to-infinite-languages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Actually, you don't need any signature: $L={=}$ is completely fine.
Note that you can express the property for any $nin mathbb{N}$ that the model contains at least $n$ different elements. In fact, there is a finite first-order formula that expresses this. Let $phi_n$ be such a formula.
(E.g., $phi_3$ is $exists x_1,x_2,x_3 ,, x_1neq x_2 wedge x_2neq x_3 wedge x_1neq x_3$.)
The theory $T$ now consists of
$bullet$ all the $phi_n$,
$bullet$ and the formula that says that one of the $phi_n$ must be false (this is an infinite disjunction of all the negations of the $phi_n$)
Altogether, this means that the model is infinite and finite (contradiction).
But any finite subsystem is satisfiable (by some finite set).
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually, you don't need any signature: $L={=}$ is completely fine.
Note that you can express the property for any $nin mathbb{N}$ that the model contains at least $n$ different elements. In fact, there is a finite first-order formula that expresses this. Let $phi_n$ be such a formula.
(E.g., $phi_3$ is $exists x_1,x_2,x_3 ,, x_1neq x_2 wedge x_2neq x_3 wedge x_1neq x_3$.)
The theory $T$ now consists of
$bullet$ all the $phi_n$,
$bullet$ and the formula that says that one of the $phi_n$ must be false (this is an infinite disjunction of all the negations of the $phi_n$)
Altogether, this means that the model is infinite and finite (contradiction).
But any finite subsystem is satisfiable (by some finite set).
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Actually, you don't need any signature: $L={=}$ is completely fine.
Note that you can express the property for any $nin mathbb{N}$ that the model contains at least $n$ different elements. In fact, there is a finite first-order formula that expresses this. Let $phi_n$ be such a formula.
(E.g., $phi_3$ is $exists x_1,x_2,x_3 ,, x_1neq x_2 wedge x_2neq x_3 wedge x_1neq x_3$.)
The theory $T$ now consists of
$bullet$ all the $phi_n$,
$bullet$ and the formula that says that one of the $phi_n$ must be false (this is an infinite disjunction of all the negations of the $phi_n$)
Altogether, this means that the model is infinite and finite (contradiction).
But any finite subsystem is satisfiable (by some finite set).
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
$endgroup$
Actually, you don't need any signature: $L={=}$ is completely fine.
Note that you can express the property for any $nin mathbb{N}$ that the model contains at least $n$ different elements. In fact, there is a finite first-order formula that expresses this. Let $phi_n$ be such a formula.
(E.g., $phi_3$ is $exists x_1,x_2,x_3 ,, x_1neq x_2 wedge x_2neq x_3 wedge x_1neq x_3$.)
The theory $T$ now consists of
$bullet$ all the $phi_n$,
$bullet$ and the formula that says that one of the $phi_n$ must be false (this is an infinite disjunction of all the negations of the $phi_n$)
Altogether, this means that the model is infinite and finite (contradiction).
But any finite subsystem is satisfiable (by some finite set).
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
answered Jan 8 at 20:19
A. PongráczA. Pongrácz
5,9531929
5,9531929
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3066636%2fwhy-does-the-compactness-theorem-not-apply-to-infinite-languages%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
What does $W$ represent? I guess $0$ is a constant symbol and $S$ is a function? Please explain all your notations (in general).
$endgroup$
– A. Pongrácz
Jan 8 at 19:49
$begingroup$
Sorry, I am new to formatting. W with a subscript n is supposed to represent the infinite disjunction.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:52
$begingroup$
And yes, 0 is a constant symbol and S is a function. Sorry again for ugly formatting.
$endgroup$
– JanikG.
Jan 8 at 19:53
$begingroup$
I edited your post to include MathJax formatting. You should use this formatting in future posts on this site. Here's a tutorial / reference on how to do this: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5020/…
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:21
$begingroup$
"Every subset $Gamma_m$ of $Gamma_n$... has a finite model for every $m$ smaller than $n$" doesn't make any sense to me. It would make more sense notationally to let $Gamma = {Gamma_nmid nin omega}$, and show that $Gamma$ is finitely satisfiable by arguing that for every $n$, the set ${Gamma_mmid m<n}$ has a model. (Whether this model is finite is irrelevant.) But in any case, your choice of $Gamma_n$ doesn't work.
$endgroup$
– Alex Kruckman
Jan 9 at 15:24