2
$\begingroup$

Suppose we have structures $M \subseteq N \subseteq P$ in some first order language. If $M \prec N$ and $M \prec P$, does it follow that $N \prec P$? If not, what is a counterexample?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It is not true, but some other similar statements are true: $\preceq$ is transitive (so $M\preceq N$ and $N\preceq P$ implies $M\preceq P$) and inclusion between elementary substructures is always elementary (so if $M\preceq P$ and $N\preceq P$ and $M\subseteq N$, then $M\preceq N$). $\endgroup$ – tomasz Mar 1 '15 at 3:12
5
$\begingroup$

From $M\preceq N$ and $M\preceq P$ it only follows that $N\equiv_M P$. For a counter example consider the following structures of signature $L=\{<\}$.

$P=\{0,1\}\times {\mathbb Z}$ ordered with the lexicographic order.

$M=\{0\}\times{\mathbb Z}$

$N=\{0\}\times{\mathbb Z}\ \cup\ \{1\}\times 2{\mathbb Z}$, where $2{\mathbb Z}$ is the set of even integers.

Then $M\preceq N$ and $M\preceq P$ as required. But clearly $N\not\preceq P$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.