Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T05:53:36.813Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Omitting types for stable ccc theories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Ludomir Newelski*
Affiliation:
Mathematical Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, 51-617 Wrocław, Poland

Extract

In this paper we investigate omitting types for a certain kind of stable theories which we call stable ccc theories. In Theorem 2.1 we improve Steinhorn's result from [St]. We prove also some independence results concerning omitting types. The main results presented in this paper were part of the author's Ph.D. thesis [N1].

Throughout, we use the standard set-theoretic and model-theoretic notation, such as can be found for example in [Sh] or [M]. So in particular T is always a countable complete theory in the language L. We consider all models of T and all sets of parameters subsets of the monster model ℭ, which is very saturated. Ln(A) denotes the Lindenbaum-Tarski algebra of formulas with parameters from A and n free variables. We omit n in Ln(A) when n = 1 or when it is clear from the context what n is. If φ, ψL(A) are consistent then we say that φ is below ψ if ψψ. For a type p and a set A ⊆ ℭ, p(A) is the set of tuples of elements of A which satisfy p. Formulas are special cases of types. We say that a type p is isolated over A if, for some φ()L(A), φ()p(x), i.e. φ isolates p. For a formula φ, [φ] denotes the class of types which contain φ. We assume that the reader is familiar with some basic knowledge of forking, as presented in [Sh, III] or [M].

Throughout, we work in ZFC. and denote (countable) transitive models of ZFC. cov K is the minimal number of meager sets covering the real line R. In this paper we prove theorems showing connections between omitting types and the combinatorics of the real line. More results in this direction are presented in [N2] and [N3].

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1990

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

[Bu]Bukovský, L., Random forcing, Set theory and hierarchy theory. V (Bierutowice, 1976), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 619, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977, pp. 101117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[La1]Lachlan, A. H., A property of stable theories, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 77 (1972), pp. 920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[La2]Lachlan, A. H., A remark on the strict order property, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 21 (1975), pp. 6970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[M]Makkai, M., A survey of basic stability theory, with particular emphasis on orthogonality and regular types, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 49 (1984), pp. 181238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[N1]Newelski, L., Ph.D. thesis, Institute of Mathematics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław, 1986.Google Scholar
[N2]Newelski, L., Omitting types and the real line, this Journal, vol. 52 (1987), pp. 10201026.Google Scholar
[N3]Newelski, L., Independence results for uncountable superstable theories, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 65 (1989), pp. 5978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Sh]Shelah, S., Classification theory and the number of non-isomorphic types, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
[St]Steinhorn, Ch., A new omitting types theorem, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 89 (1983), pp. 480486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar