Questions tagged [definability]
definability by formulas in first-order logic, e.g. as explained at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definable_set, or as in J. Robinson's first-order definition of the integers in the field of rationals
15
questions with no upvoted or accepted answers
33
votes
0
answers
2k
views
Defining $\mathbb{Z}$ in $\mathbb{Q}$
It was proved by Poonen that $\mathbb{Z}$ is definable in the structure $(\mathbb{Q}, +, \cdot, 0, 1)$ using $\forall \exists$ formula. Koenigsmann has shown that $\mathbb{Z}$ is in fact definable by ...
10
votes
0
answers
211
views
Are the nonnegative rationals diophantine with only two quantifiers?
Definition: A subset $D\subseteq \mathbb{Q}$ is diophantine if it is the projection of the zero set of a polynomial, i.e. there exists a polynomial $f\in\mathbb{Q}[X,Y_1,\dots,Y_n]$ for some $n$ such ...
10
votes
0
answers
316
views
Definability up to isomorphism versus definability of an isomorphic copy
Question: Is it provable in ZFC that every structure that is ordinal definable up to isomorphism has an ordinal definable isomorphic copy? If not, what are some counterexamples? All structures are ...
9
votes
0
answers
320
views
Is there a definable model of PA whose domain is a proper class and whose complete theory is not definable?
Assume ZFC. Is there a formula of $\mathcal{L}_\in$ (without parameters) defining a model $\mathcal{M}$ of PA whose domain is a proper class but the complete theory of that model is not definable by ...
8
votes
0
answers
349
views
Cohen's model yet again
It has been discussed already whether a countable OD set necessarily contains an OD element. See e.g.
A question about ordinal definable real numbers
.
A negative answer was obtained in Archive for ...
6
votes
0
answers
249
views
Can HCD accommodate all known large cardinal axioms?
HOD has been found to be useful in that it is an inner model that can accommodate essentially all known large cardinals.
However, there is a definable well ordering over HOD, so it cannot satisfy ...
5
votes
0
answers
143
views
Higher-order equivalence of ordinals
I wonder which ordinals are second-order equivalent, and similarly for other logical equivalences. Let the signature be fixed and include only <. For concreteness, let us first ask for the first ...
5
votes
0
answers
140
views
Self-additive posets
We say that a partially ordered set $(P,<)$ is self-additive if the two natural embeddings of $P$ in $P\oplus P$ (the linear sum of $P$ and itself) are elementary.
We have the following.
...
4
votes
0
answers
523
views
A question regarding the "math tea" argument
Joel David Hamkins published a paper where he analyzes the "math tea" argument, namely, the argument that some real numbers are undefinable. He constructed a countable model of set theory ...
4
votes
0
answers
48
views
Closed and bounded intervals of definably complete ordered groups
True or false?
All closed and bounded intervals of definably complete
ordered groups are definably compact.
Let $G$ be an ordered abelian group. Then, a definable subset $D ⊆ G$ is said to be ...
2
votes
0
answers
127
views
Quantifierisation of maps
I will rewrite my question using Matt F. suggestion.
Consider the logical structure $L = (\mathbb{R}, +, *, 1, 0, =)$ and a function $f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$.
Consider the map $Q:2^\mathbb{R}→2^\...
2
votes
0
answers
311
views
Can we have $\sf V=HTD$? How it relates to $\sf V=HOD$?
In my search for some type-set motivated line of thought that might prove axiom of choice, I was thinking of a concept that looks like $\sf V=HOD$, but in terms of types instead of ordinals, that is ...
1
vote
0
answers
154
views
Can ordinal definability be defined using no more than one ordinal parameter?
This answer shows that one can indeed define ordinal definable this way:
$\begin{align} \textbf{Define: } & \operatorname {OD} (X) \iff \\& \exists \theta \, \exists \varphi: X= \{y \in V_\...
1
vote
0
answers
51
views
Can we define the notion of ordinal\cardinal definable set in Z + Ranks?
Working in Zermelo + Ranks, can we define the notions "ordinal definable" set, "cardinal definable" set? Or does it beg Replacement\Reflection to be defined?
1
vote
0
answers
92
views
Is definability in $V$ in $\sf Ack+MK$ expressible in its language?
Recall Ackermann set theory. If we extend Ackermann's set theory by adding all axioms of $\sf MK$ to it. We shall denote the universe of all elements by $W$, while $V$ is the primitive constant symbol ...