TY - JOUR
T1 - Models with second order properties IV. A general method and eliminating diamonds
AU - Shelah, Saharon
PY - 1983/11
Y1 - 1983/11
N2 - We show how to build various models of first-order theories, which also have properties like: tree with only definable branches, atomic Boolean algebras or ordered fields with only definable automorphisms. For this we use a set-theoretic assertion, which may be interesting by itself on the existence of quite generic subsets of suitable partial orders of power λ+, which follows from {black diamond suit}λ and even weaker hypotheses (e.g., λ=א0, or λ strongly inaccessible). For a related assertion, which is equivalent to the morass see Shelah and Stanley [16]. The various specific constructions serve also as examples of how to use this set-theoretic lemma. We apply the method to construct rigid ordered fields, rigid atomic Boolean algebras, trees with only definable branches; all in successors of regular cardinals under appropriate set- theoretic assumptions. So we are able to answer (under suitable set-theoretic assumptions) the following algebraic question. Saltzman's Question. Is there a rigid real closed field, which is not a subfield of the reals?
AB - We show how to build various models of first-order theories, which also have properties like: tree with only definable branches, atomic Boolean algebras or ordered fields with only definable automorphisms. For this we use a set-theoretic assertion, which may be interesting by itself on the existence of quite generic subsets of suitable partial orders of power λ+, which follows from {black diamond suit}λ and even weaker hypotheses (e.g., λ=א0, or λ strongly inaccessible). For a related assertion, which is equivalent to the morass see Shelah and Stanley [16]. The various specific constructions serve also as examples of how to use this set-theoretic lemma. We apply the method to construct rigid ordered fields, rigid atomic Boolean algebras, trees with only definable branches; all in successors of regular cardinals under appropriate set- theoretic assumptions. So we are able to answer (under suitable set-theoretic assumptions) the following algebraic question. Saltzman's Question. Is there a rigid real closed field, which is not a subfield of the reals?
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0011277367&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0168-0072(83)90013-1
DO - 10.1016/0168-0072(83)90013-1
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:0011277367
SN - 0168-0072
VL - 25
SP - 183
EP - 212
JO - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic
JF - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic
IS - 2
ER -