Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Good evening,

Can someone explain to me the notion of internality in model theory (what it is, where it comes from...) ?

Thank you

share|improve this question
    
I'm no in logic too muchm, but I guess that you have to know the internal logic in some categories/topos, see the P. Johnstone book o on topos theory –  Buschi Sergio Nov 30 '11 at 16:44
3  
@Buschi - I disagree. There is 'model theory' which has no connections to category theory whatsoever: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_theory @Alphonse - is this what you meant? And please provide a reference as to where you heard about internality. People need to know at what level to pitch their answers. –  David Roberts Nov 30 '11 at 21:29
    
Thank you Buschi for your help but David Roberts is right en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_theory is what I meant. @David Roberts Thank you for your answer. I heard this term in a seminar. I can't give specific reference but I'm a beginner. –  user19660 Dec 1 '11 at 10:50
    
I'm entirely guessing what you're after of course, but are you perhaps thinking of inner model theory? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_model_theory –  Ed Dean Dec 1 '11 at 16:54
2  
Internality can also show up if you're dealing with a model of a theory which can define notions like "finite," "well-ordered," etc. So, for example, we can have a model $M$ of ZFC set theory and some $x\in M$ such that $M\models$ "$x$ is finite," and yet still have infinitely many $y\in M$ with $M\models y\in x$; this would be an example of an infinite internally finite object. In nonstandard analysis, there is a similar distinction between internal sets, which are sets that a given model "sees," and sets in general. Is this what you're interested in? –  Noah S Dec 1 '11 at 17:26

3 Answers 3

The standard use in model theory is something like this. A partial type $p$ is internal to a type $q$ if there is a definable function $f$ such that any realization of $p$ is equal to $f(c_1,\dots,c_m)$ where $c_1,\dots,c_m$ are realizations of $q$.

A typical example from differential fields: Let $X$ be the set of solutions of a linear differential equation of order $n$. Then $X$ is internal to the constants. Let $a_1,\dots,a_n$ be a fundamental system of solutions. Let $f(c_1,\dots,c_n)=\sum c_ia_i$. Then every element of $X$ is the image of an $n$-tuple of constants.

share|improve this answer

The use of 'internality' in model theory that is most familiar to me is its use in nonstandard analysis. Look at 'internal' in the wikipedia article on non-standard analysis and see if that is what you remember.

share|improve this answer
1  
John, welcome to MO! Backticks play a special role in the markdown syntax that MO uses. Unfortunately, this conflicts with ordinary LaTeX usage. The rule of thumb is to only use LaTeX syntax when in math mode. –  François G. Dorais Dec 6 '11 at 3:50

Could you be thinking of Skolem's Paradox?

It is sometimes explained in terms of "internal sets", the sets that a model can "see". Example:

That's a description of why a theory containing the power set of the integers still has a countable model. The model doesn't actually contain the full powerset, but it also doesn't contain a bijection between its integers and its sets of integers, so "internally" the power set is uncountable even though it's countable "externally".

If that's what you're looking for, then http://math.stackexchange.com is probably a better place than here for follow-up discussion.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.