Some Questions concerning Minimal Structures
نویسندگان
چکیده
An infinite first-order structure is minimal if its each definable subset is either finite or co-finite. We formulate three questions concerning order properties of minimal structures which are motivated by Pillay’s Conjecture (stating that a countable first-order structure must have infinitely many countable, pairwise non-isomorphic elementary extensions). In this article a connection between articles [7] and [8] is explained in order to motivate some questions concerning minimal, first-order structures which I could not answer. On the way, a minor gap which appeared in [8] will be fixed; thanks to Enrique Casanovas for pointing it out to me. The original motivation for this work comes from Pillay’s work on countable elementary extensions of first-order structures. If M0 = (M0, . . . ) is a countable first-order structure and M0 ≺ M1, M0 ≺ M2 then we say that M1 and M2 are isomorphic over M0 if there is an isomorphism between them fixing M0 pointwise. Pillay’s Conjecture. Any countable first-order structure M0 has infinitely many countable elementary extensions which are pairwise non-isomorphic over M0. There are a few results partially confirming Pillay’s Conjecture. The initial result of Pillay’s is in [3] where he proved that there are at least four nonisomorphic countable elementary extensions of M0. There he also reduces the general case to the case when M0 is minimal and has small theory (|S(M0)| = א0); recall that an infinite first-order structure is minimal if its each definable (possibly with parameters) subset is either finite or co-finite. By a well known result of Baldwin and Lachlan, see [1], any countable strongly minimal structure has infinitely many countable pairwise non-isomorphic elementary extensions, so the conjecture is true for strongly minimal structures (a minimal structure is strongly minimal if the minimality is preserved in all elementarily equivalent structures). Belegradek in [2] found a pattern for constructing minimal, but not strongly minimal structures; other examples of such structures are (ω,<) and (ω+ω∗, <) (where ω∗ is reversely ordered ω). 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 03C15. Supported by Ministry of Science of Serbia.
منابع مشابه
Concerning the frame of minimal prime ideals of pointfree function rings
Let $L$ be a completely regular frame and $mathcal{R}L$ be the ring of continuous real-valued functions on $L$. We study the frame $mathfrak{O}(Min(mathcal{R}L))$ of minimal prime ideals of $mathcal{R}L$ in relation to $beta L$. For $Iinbeta L$, denote by $textit{textbf{O}}^I$ the ideal ${alphainmathcal{R}Lmidcozalphain I}$ of $mathcal{R}L$. We show that sending $I$ to the set of minimal prime ...
متن کاملON THE CAPACITY OF EILENBERG-MACLANE AND MOORE SPACES
K. Borsuk in 1979, at the Topological Conference in Moscow, introduced concept of the capacity of a compactum and asked some questions concerning properties of the capacity ofcompacta. In this paper, we give partial positive answers to three of these questions in some cases. In fact, by describing spaces homotopy dominated by Moore and Eilenberg-MacLane spaces, the capacities of a Moore space $...
متن کاملGroup actions on 4-manifolds: some recent results and open questions
A survey of finite group actions on symplectic 4-manifolds is given with a special emphasis on results and questions concerning smooth or symplectic classification of group actions, group actions and exotic smooth structures, and homological rigidity and boundedness of group actions. We also take this opportunity to include several results and questions which did not appear elsewhere.
متن کاملThe geometry of Hrushovski constructions, II. The strongly minimal case
We investigate the isomorphism types of combinatorial geometries arising from Hrushovski’s flat strongly minimal structures and answer some questions from Hrushovski’s original paper.
متن کاملSome Questions concerning Hrushovski’s Amalgamation Constructions
In his book on stable groups [Poi87] Poizat writes (with respect to our 1987 understanding of ω-stable fields): ”Nous n’avons pas fait de progrès décisif depuis le temps oú nous chassions les aurochs avec une hache de pierre; nous avons seulment acquis une meilleure comprehension de l’enjeu du problem”. Sadly, there is no better way to describe the current situation with respect to the problem ...
متن کامل