Timeline for Elementary chains of $\aleph_1$-saturated models
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 26, 2014 at 13:46 | comment | added | user49449 | Your counterexample completely answers my question. | |
| Jun 26, 2014 at 13:37 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Jun 26, 2014 at 0:55 | comment | added | Joel David Hamkins | Yes, I had meant that part to refer only to models with the order relation, which is all my examples require. But still, doesn't this fully answer the question? In some instances, I show, the union is not $\aleph_1$ saturated, and in other instances, it is. | |
| Jun 25, 2014 at 23:21 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 180 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2014 at 22:25 | history | edited | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1172 characters in body
|
| Jun 25, 2014 at 22:21 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | The assertions in your second paragraph are not true in general. They only hold if the language contains nothing but the ordering (which is however fine for the counterexample). | |
| Jun 25, 2014 at 22:07 | history | answered | Joel David Hamkins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |