Skip to main content
Log in

Definibility in normal theories

  • Published:
Israel Journal of Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper initiates an investigation which seeks to explain elementary definability as the classical results of mathematicallogic (the completeness, compactness and Löwenheim-Skolem theorems) explain elementary logical consequence. The theorems of Beth and Svenonius are basic in this approach and introduce automorphism groups as a means of studying these problems. It is shown that for a complete theoryT, the definability relation of Beth (or Svenonius) yields an upper semi-lattice whose elements (concepts) are interdefinable formulas ofT (formulas having equal automorphism groups in all models ofT). It is shown that there are countable modelsA ofT such that two formulae are distinct (not interdefinable) inT if and only if they are distinct (have different automorphism groups) inA. The notion of a concepth being normal in a theoryT is introduced. Here the upper semi-lattice of all concepts which defineh is proved to be a finite lattice—anti-isomorphic to the lattice of subgroups of the corresponding automorphism group. Connections with the Galois theory of fields are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. E. W. Beth,On Padoa’s method in the theory of definitions, Indag. Math.15 (1953).

  2. J. R. Buchi,Relatively Categorical and Normal Theories, in The Theory of Models, Amsterdam, 1965.

  3. J. R. Buchi and K. J. Danhof,Model Theoretic Approaches to Definability, Z. Math. Logik Grundlagen Math.18 (1972), 61–70.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. J. R. Buchi and J. B. Wright,The theory of proportionality as an abstraction of group theory, Math. Ann.130 (1955).

  5. J. R. Buchi and J. B. Wright,Invariants of the anti-automorphisms of a group, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.8 (1957).

  6. W. Craig,Linear reasoning. A new form of the Herbrand-Gentzen theorem, J. Symbolic Logic22 (1957).

  7. W. Craig,Tree uses of the Herband-Gentzen theorem in relating model theorey and proof theory, J. Symbolic Logic22 (1957).

  8. K.J. Danhof,Concepts in normal theories, Notices Amer. Math. Soc.71 T-E26 (1971).

  9. D. Hilbert and P. Bernays,Grundlagen der Mathematik, Vol. 1, Berlin, 1934.

  10. F. Klein,Vergleichende Betrachutngen über neuere geometrische Forschungen, Verlag A. Deicher, Erlangen, 1872.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A. Robinson,A result on consistency and its application to the theory of definition, Indag. Math.18 (1956), 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  12. L. Svenonius,A theorem on permutations in models, Theoria (Lund)25 (1959).

  13. A. Tarski,Der Wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten Sprachen, Studia Philosophica1, (1936).

  14. A. Tarski,Einige Methodologische Untersuchungen über die Definierbarkeit der Begriffe Erkenntnis5 (1935).

  15. J.B. Wright,Quasi-projective geometry of two dimensions, Michigan Math. J.2 (1953–4).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richard Buchi, J., Danhof, K.J. Definibility in normal theories. Israel J. Math. 14, 248–256 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02764883

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02764883

Keywords

Navigation