14
$\begingroup$

It is well-known that the structure $(\mathbb{R}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1)$ is an o-minimal structure and hence the set of integers $\mathbb{Z}$ is not definable in it.

In an ongoing project with Will Brian, we are discussing some properties of Cohen and random generic reals. One of the properties we are discussing is about definability of $\mathbb{Z}$ after adding a Cohen or a random real.

Let $V[G]$ be a generic extension of $V$ by adding a Cohen (resp. random) real $r$ over $V$. Then we can prove the following:

(1) If we consider $r$ as a constant, then $\mathbb{Z}$ is not definable in $(\mathbb{R}^{V[G]}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1, r)$, and in fact this structure remains o-minimal (this is a known fact).

(2) If we consider $r \subset \mathbb{N}$ as a predicate, then $\mathbb{Z}$ is definable in $(\mathbb{R}^{V[G]}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1, r)$ (This is easily seen as $\mathbb{Z}=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^{V[G]}: \exists a, b \in r, x=a - b \}$).

We also have proved the following.

(3) There exists a generic extension $V[G]$ of $V$ by adding a single real $r$, such that considering $r$ as a predicate, $\mathbb{Z}$ is not definable in $(\mathbb{R}^{V[G]}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1, r)$.

Now the following question arises.

Question. Let $V[G]$ be a generic extension of $V$ by adding a Cohen (resp. random) real over $V$. Let $C=\{x \in \mathbb{R}^{V[G]}: x$ is Cohen (resp. random) over $V \}$. Is $\mathbb{Z}$ definable in $(\mathbb{R}^{V[G]}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1, C)$.

Remark. The structure $(\mathbb{R}^{V[G]}, +, \cdot, <, 0, 1, C)$ is not o-minimal.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Isn't (1) trivial? Naming an element can't change o-minimality since o-minimality refers to definitions with parameters. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 10, 2018 at 16:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @NoahSchweberN Yes, that is essentially what I had in mind, o-minimality is preserved by adding constants $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2018 at 1:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (2) seems suspiciously straightforward. In some sense, adding $r\subset {\mathbb N}$ as a predicate you are adding something "very similar" to $\mathbb N$ or $\mathbb Z$ (but then (3) seems strange - what kind of generic extension gives (3)?) --- Now, for the Question: The set C of all Cohen reals is comeager in the new reals. My quick guess would be that some careful use of genericity implies non-definability of $\mathbb Z$. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2018 at 14:08
  • $\begingroup$ Does the formula $\phi(x) := \forall y \in C (x+y \in C)$ define the ground reals? (This doesn't have direct bearing on the question, but came up as I was playing around with it) $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 11, 2018 at 17:00
  • $\begingroup$ @AndrésVillaveces The paper is now available Combinatorial and number-theoretic properties of generic reals. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 5, 2021 at 10:49

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .