L (PhD Thesis Defense) -...

39
Quantifier Rank Spectrum of L (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006

Transcript of L (PhD Thesis Defense) -...

Page 1: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Quantifier Rank Spectrum of

L∞,ω (PhD Thesis Defense)

by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman

April 19, 2006

Page 2: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 1. If L is a relational language then

Lω1,ω(L) is the smallest collection of formulas

such that if φ(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L) then

• L ⊆ Lω1,ω(L)

• ¬φ(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

• (∀y)φ(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

• (∃y)φ(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

and if {ψi(x) : i ∈ ω} ⊆ Lω1,ω(L) where⋃

i∈ωFree

Variables(φi) is finite then

• ∧i∈ω ψi(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

• ∨i∈ω ψi(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

1

Page 3: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 2. If L is a relational language and

φ(x) ∈ Lω1,ω(L) we define the quantifier rank

of φ(x) (qr(φ(x))) by induction:

• qr(R(x)) = 0 if R is a relation in L.

• qr(¬φ(x)) = qr(φ(x)).

• qr(∧

i∈ω ψi(x)) = sup{qr(ψi) : i ∈ ω}.

• qr((∀y)ψ(x)) = qr(ψ(x)) + 1.

2

Page 4: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 3. If M , N are models of the lan-

guage L then we say M is equivalent to N up

to α (M ≡α N) if and only if for all φ ∈ Lω1,ω(L)

with qr(φ) ≤ α

M |= φ ⇔ N |= φ

Definition 4. We say that the quantifier rank

of M (qr(M)) is α if α is the least ordinal such

that for all models N of L

M ≡α N ⇒ (∀β < ω1)M ≡β N

3

Page 5: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We know, by the following theorem of

Dana Scott, that in the case of countable mod-

els this is notion is well defined and further the

quantifier rank of any countable model is itself

countable.

Theorem 5 (Scott). If M is a countable model

of the language L then there is a formula φM

of Lω1,ω such that

• M |= φM

• For all models N of L

N |= φM → N ∼= M

Further, as we will only be interested in

countable models for this talk we will assume

all models are countable and all models have

countable quantifier rank.

4

Page 6: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 6. Let φ ∈ Lω1,ω(L). We define the

quantifier rank spectrum of φ (qr(φ)) to be

{qr(M) : M |= φ ∧ |M | = ω}

In this talk we will primarily be interested

in particularly well behaved formulas.

Definition 7. Let φ ∈ Lω1,ω. We say that φ is

Scattered if

(∀α ∈ qr(φ))|{M : M |= φ ∧ |M | = ω

∧ qr(M) = α}| = ω

Theorem 8 (Morley). Let φ ∈ Lω1,ω. Then φ

is scattered if and only if |{M : M |= φ and M is

countable}| = ω or ω1 in all forcing extensions

of the universe.

5

Page 7: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

The main result of Part I of my thesis and

the main result of this talk is

Theorem 9. Let ω ∗α be a limit ordinal. Then

there is a scattered sentence φω∗α such that

• Quantifier rank of φω∗α ≤ ω

• Quantifier rank spectrum of φω∗α is un-

bounded in ω ∗ α

• φω∗α is scattered.

6

Page 8: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 10. Let LP = {Pn : Pn is an n-ary

predicate}.

Definition 11. Let TP be universal closure of

the following LP sentences:

(∀i1, · · · in ∈ n)Pn(x1, · · · , xn)

→ Pn(xi1, · · · , xin)

Pn+1(x0, · · · , xn) → Pn(x1, · · · , xn)

This theory puts a tree structure under

subseteq (⊆) on the finite subsets of our model.

7

Page 9: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 12. Define the color of a ∈ M (‖a‖)as follows:

• ¬P (a) ↔ ‖a‖ = −∞

• P (a) ↔ ‖a‖ ≥ 0

• If the tree extending a is wellfounded then

‖a‖ = sup{‖ab‖ : b ∈ M}

• ‖a‖ = ∞ otherwise.

Definition 13. Let M |= TP . Then the Spec-

trum of M (Spec(M)) = {‖a‖ : a ⊆ M}

8

Page 10: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 14. Let f : m → ORD such that

f(m +1)+1 = f(m). Then we say that f is a

slow slant line.

Definition 15. Let f be a slant line. We say

that two tuples 〈ai : i ∈ n〉 and 〈bi : i ∈ n〉 are

the same up to f if for all S ⊆ n

• ‖〈ai : i ∈ S〉‖ = ‖〈bi : i ∈ S‖〉

• ‖〈ai : i ∈ S〉‖ > f(|S|) and ‖〈bi : i ∈ S‖〉 >

f(|S|)

9

Page 11: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Tuples

Color

ω ∗ α + 6

ω ∗ α + 5

ω ∗ α + 4

ω ∗ α + 3

ω ∗ α + 2

ω ∗ α + 1

ω ∗ α

a1 a2 a3 a1a2 a2a3 a1a3 a1a2a3

fg

10

Page 12: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 16. Let LR = LP ∪ {Ri,j≤ : R

i,j≤ is an

i + j-ary predicate}.

We will abuse notation and consider Ri,j≤ as a

predicate of two arguments, one of arity i and

one of arity j.

Definition 17. Let TR be universal closure of

the following LR sentences:

TP

R≤(x,y) ↔ [[¬P (x)] ∨ [P (x) → P (y)

∧(∀a)(∃b)R≤(xa,yb)]]

This expanded theory TR will be useful

because we have the following theorem

Theorem 18. If M |= TR and has no tuples of

color ∞ then M |= (∀a, b)R≤(a, b) ↔ ‖a‖ ≤ ‖b‖

11

Page 13: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

The “nice” scattered sentences will have what

we call a Collection of Archetypes. The collec-

tion of archetypes for a sentence T will consist

of four pieces of information

• A set AT(T ) of archetypes

• A partial order 〈2−AT(T ),≤〉 of on certain

pairs of archetypes (called consistent pairs

of archetypes)

• A collection BP(T ) of base predicates (along

with consistent pairs of base predicates

〈2−BP (T ),≤〉)

• An “Extra Information” function EIT : AT(T )∪{M : M |= T} → X ×ORD

12

Page 14: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Definition 19. Let T be our theory with nice

properties in a language L. Further let M |=TP . Then define

L(M) = L1 ∪ L2 ∪ {Q, R2≤} ∪ {ci : i ∈M}

Definition 20. Let T (M) be universal closure

of the following L(M) sentences:

Q:

• Q(x) ↔ ∨a∈M x = ca

• Q |= φ(ca1, · · · can) in L2 iffM |= φ(a1, · · · an)

• Q(x) ∧ ¬Q(y) → ¬U(x,y) where U is any

predicate other than R2≤ and |x| > 0

13

Page 15: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

L2 :

• (∀x)(∃c)Q(c)R2≤(x, c)

• (∀c)(∃x)¬Q(x) ∧R2≤(x, c)

Other Axioms:

• ¬Q |= T2

• ¬Q |= T1

• ¬Q |= P1(x) → P2(x)

14

Page 16: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

• Homogeneity:

For all (A, A∗), (B, B∗) consistent pairs of

base predicates such that (A, A∗) ≤ (B, B∗),and all m ∈ ω

¬Q |=[(∀x)[A1(x) ∧A2∗(x)] →(∃y1, · · ·ym)(B1(x,y) ∧B2∗ (x,y))]

• Completeness:

(∀x)(∃y)∨

(A,A′)∈2−BP (T )

(A, A′)(xy)

15

Page 17: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We are going to want our theory T to have

properties which allow us to prove the following

Theorem 21. If

• M, N |= T (M)

• M |L1 ≡ω∗α N |L1

• M |L2 ∼= N |L2

then M ≡ω∗α N

Theorem 22. If Spec(M) ⊆ Spec(M) then

there is a model M ′ |= T (M) such that M ′|L1 ∼=M .

Theorem 23. If ω ∗ α < Spec(M) which is

a limit ordinal then there are M, N such that

M ≡ω∗α N and Spec(M)∪Spec(N) ⊆ Spec(M).

16

Page 18: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We are now ready to give our definition of a

collection of archetypes

(Truth on Atomic Formulas for Archetypes)

If M |= φ(x) and N |= φ(y) where φ is an

archetype then for every atomic formula ψ,

M |= ψ(x) iff N |= ψ(y).

(Truth on Color)

If φ ∈ AT(T ) and φ(x1, · · · , xn), φ(y1, · · · , yn)

then ‖{xi : i ∈ S‖ = ‖{yi : i ∈ S‖ for all S ⊆ n.

(Truth on Atomic Formulas for Base Predicates)

If M |= A(x) and N |= B(y) where B is a

base predicatethen for every atomic formula

ψ, M |= ψ(x) iff N |= ψ(y).

17

Page 19: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Restriction of Arity for Archetypes)

If φ is an archetype on a tuple x and y is a

subset of x then we can restrict φ to y and get

an archetype.

(Completeness for Archetypes)

If φ is an archetype which describes a tuple x

and x∧y extends x then there is some archetype

which describes x∧y.

18

Page 20: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Amalgamation for Archetypes)

If φ and ψ are archetypes which agree on the

what they force to be true on their common

domain then there is a consistent extension of

A and B which forces all “new” colors to be

−∞.

(Amalgamation for Base Predicates)

If A and B are base predicates which agree on

the what they force to be true on their com-

mon domain then there is a consistent exten-

sion of A and B which forces all “new” colors

to be −∞.

19

Page 21: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Homogeneity for Base Predicates)

If B is a base predicate which forces another

base predicate A to hold and M |= A(a) then

there are infinitely many extensions {bi : i ∈ ω}of a such that M |= A(a∧b)

(Uniqueness of Base Predicate)

This says that each tuple realizes at most one

base predicate

(Completeness of Extra Information)

This says that the extra information predicate

for a model is just the union of the extra infor-

mation from each archetype which is realized.

20

Page 22: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Now we come to two of the most important

properties of a collection of archetypes.

(Prediction)

If σ, τ are archetypes such that τ(x,y) forces

σ(x) then there is an archetype ητ(a) and a

base predicate Aτ such that

• M |= (∃x,y)τ(x,y) if and only if M |= (∃a)ητ(a)

• (∀M |= T ) M |= [ητ(a)∧σ(x)∧Aτ(x,y, z, a)] →τ(x,y).

If η(a)

σ(x)

A(x,y, z, a)

then η(a)

σ(x)

A(x,y, z, a)

τ(x,y)

21

Page 23: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Prediction up to a Slant Line)

If σ, σ′, τ are archetypes such that

• τ(x,y) forces σ(x)

• σ and σ′ force the colors on their domains

to be the same up to a slant line sl

• sl(1) = ω ∗ λ + |xy|+ n

then there is an archetype ητ |sl(a) and a base

predicate Aτ |sl such that

• If M |= (∃a)σ′(a) then M |= (∃b)(ητ |sl(b)

• For all M |= T if M |= [ητ |sl(a) ∧ σ′(x) ∧Aτ |sl(x,y,z, a)]∧τ ′(x,y) then τ and τ ′ forcethe colors of the tuples they describe to be

the same up to slant line sl

22

Page 24: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Consistency of Color)

If (φ, φ′) is a consistent pair archetypes then

any color φ′ forces must be at least as large as

the color φ forces on the same tuple.

(Consistency of ≤)

≤ on consistent archetype pairs is transitive

and if (φ0, φ1) ≤ (ψ0, ψ1) then ψi is the restric-

tion of φi to its domain.

(Restriction of Arity for 2-Seq. of Archetypes)

If (φ0, φ1)(x,y) ≤ (ψ0, ψ1)(x) and (ζ0, ζ1) is a

restriction of (φ0, φ1)(x,y) to x,z with z ⊆ y

then (ζ0, ζ1) ≤ (ψ0, ψ1)

23

Page 25: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Amalgamation for 2-Sequences of Archetypes)

If (φ0, φ1) and (ψ0, ψ1) are consistent pairs of

archetypes which each force the same informa-

tion on their common domain then the amal-

gamations which give all “new” tuples color

−∞ is also a consistent archetype pair and ≤(φ0, φ1) and (ψ0, ψ1).

24

Page 26: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Homogeneity of 2-Sequences of Archetypes)

Suppose

• (σ, σ′), (τ, τ ′), (η, η′) are consistent pairs of

archetypes

• (η, η′)(x,y) ≤ (σ, σ′)(x)

• (η, η′)(x,y) forces (B, B′)(x,y)

• (τ, τ ′)(x), (σ, σ′)(x) both force (A, A′)(x)

(where A, A′, B, B′ are base predicates). Then

there is a consistent pair of archetypes (ζ, ζ′)such that

• (ζ, ζ′)(x,y) ≤ (τ, τ ′)(x)

• (ζ, ζ′)(x,y) forces (B, B′)(x,y)

25

Page 27: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Completeness of 2-Sequences of Base Predicate)

If (τ, τ ′) is a consistent sequence of archetypes

such that (τ, τ ′) forces (A, A′) and σ, σ′ are

archetypes such that

• σ(x) forces A(x)

• σ′(x) forces A′(x)

• Every color which σ′ forces is at least as

great as the color σ forces on the same

tuple

Then (σ, σ′) is a consistent pair of archetypes.

26

Page 28: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

(Extension of 0-Colors)

Suppose (σ, σ′) is a consistent pair of archetypes.

Further assume that τ ′(x,y) forces σ′(x). Then,

if τ(x,y) forces σ(x) and forces all “new” tu-

ples to have color −∞, (τ, τ ′) is a consistent

pair of archetypes and (τ, τ ′) ≤ (σ, σ′)

(Extension of 1-Colors)

Suppose (σ, σ′) is a consistent pair of archetypes,

τ ′(x,y) forces σ′(x) and there is some model

which realizes both τ and σ′. Then there is

an archetype τ ′ such that (τ, τ ′) is a consistent

pair of archetypes and (τ, τ ′) ≤ (σ, σ′)

Tuples

Color

τ σ

τ ′σ′

Tuples

Color

τ σ

τ ′σ′

η

η′

27

Page 29: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Theorem 24. Let N |= T (M). If

• (σ0, σ1), (τ0, τ1) ∈ 2−AT(T )

• (τ0, τ1)(x,y) ≤ (σ0, σ1)(x)

• τi is realized in N |Li

then N |= (∀x)(σ0, σ1)(x) → (∃y)(τ0, τ1)(x,y).

28

Page 30: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We start with

σ(x)

σ(x)′

then we have

σ(x)

σ(x)′

B(xy)

B′(xy)′

29

Page 31: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We know there exists

σ(x)

σ(x)′

B(xy)

B′(xy)′

ητ(a)

ητ ′(b)

and we have by Prediction

σ(x)

σ(x)′

B(xy)

B′(xy)′

ητ(a)

ητ ′(b)

A(axyz)

A′(bxyz′)

30

Page 32: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

So we have

σ(x)

σ(x)′

B(xy)

B′(xy)′

ητ(a)

ητ ′(b)

A(axyz)

A′(bxyz′)

E(abxyzz′)

E′(abxyzz′)

and this implies

σ(x)

σ(x)′

τ(xy)

τ ′(xy)′

ητ(a)

ητ ′(b)

A(axyz)

A′(bxyz′)

E(abxyzz′)

E′(abxyzz′)

31

Page 33: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Theorem 25. If

• (σ0, σ1),(σ′0, σ′1), (τ0, τ1) ∈ 2−AT(T )

• (τ0, τ1)(x,y) ≤ (σ0, σ1)(x)

• σ0|sl = σ′0|sl

then there is a τ ′0 such that (τ ′0, τ1) ≤ (σ′0, σ′1)and τ ′0|sl = τ0|sl

32

Page 34: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Lemma 26. If

• M, N |= T

• M ≡ω∗α N

• Iη∗ω+n = {f : M → N s.t. f is a bijection,

|dom(f)| < ω, there exists a slant line sl <

(η + 1) ∗ ω such that if M |= σf(dom(f))

and N |= τf(range(f)) then σf |sl = τf |sland where sl(|dom(f)|+ n) ≥ η ∗ ω}

Then 〈Iη : η < ω ∗ α〉 is a sequence of partial

isomorphisms which witness that M ≡ω∗α N .

33

Page 35: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Theorem 27. If

• M, N |= T (M)

• M |L1 ≡ω∗α N |L1

• M |L2 ∼= N |L2

then M ≡ω∗α N

Proof. Let Iω∗η+n = {f :

• |dom(f)| < ω,

• There exists a slant line sl < (η+1)∗ω such

that if M |= (σ0, σ1)(dom(f)) and N |=(τ0, τ1)(range(f)) then σ0|sl = τ0|sl, τ1 =

σ1 and where sl(|dom(f)|+ n) ≥ η ∗ ω}

34

Page 36: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

We know that Iη is non-empty for all η <

ω ∗ α by the previous lemma, and by the pre-

vious theorems we know (with out to much

work) that in fact 〈Iη : η ∈ ω ∗ α〉 has the back

and forth property and hence witnesses that

M ≡ω∗α N

Page 37: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

35

Page 38: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Theorem 28. If Θ is as in “The Vaught’s Con-

jecture: A Counter Example” then Θ has a

collection of archetypes and Θ is scattered.

Theorem 29. If M, N |= Θ, have no tuples of

color∞ and Spec(M)∩ORD,Spec(N)∩ORD ≥ω ∗ α then M ≡ω∗α N

Theorem 30. If N,Mmodels Θ and if Spec(N) ⊆Spec(M) then there is a model N ′ |= Θ(M)

such that N ′|L1 ∼= N and N ′|L2 ∼= M

36

Page 39: L (PhD Thesis Defense) - people.math.harvard.edupeople.math.harvard.edu/~nate/papers/misc/thesis/defense.pdf · (PhD Thesis Defense) by Nathanael Leedom Ackerman April 19, 2006. Deflnition

Theorem 31. IfM |= Θ and Spec(M) = {−∞}∪ω ∗ α then

• Θ(M) has quantifier rank ω

• Quantifier Rank Spectrum(Θ(M)) is un-

bounded in ω ∗ α

• Θ(M) is Scattered

37