4
$\begingroup$

if two models of ZFC have their ordinals isomorphic then there is a isomorphism between their constructibles?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't understand the downvote and vote to close - this seems like a reasonable question (if a bit poorly asked). $\endgroup$ Jan 28 '17 at 22:51
8
$\begingroup$

The answer is no.

It's not hard to show - similarly to the situation with respect to PA - that if $M$ is a countable model of ZFC such that $\omega^M$ is non-well-founded, then $ON^M$ has ordertype $(\omega+\zeta\cdot\eta)\cdot(1+\eta)$, where $\zeta$ and $\eta$ represent the ordertypes of $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Q}$ respectively.

In particular, this means:

If $M, N$ are countable models of ZFC with illfounded natural numbers, then $ON^M$ and $ON^N$ are isomorphic.

So now let $p$ be any sentence independent of ZFC+V=L (which exists by Goedel), and let $M, N$ be countable models of ZFC+V=L with illfounded natural numbers such that $M\models p$ and $N\models\neg p$ (which exist by Compactness + Lowenheim-Skolem). Then $ON^M\cong ON^N$ but $L^M=M\not\cong N=L^N$.


Even if we restrict attention to $\omega$-models the answer is no, as long as we allow ill-founded $\omega$-models. This is a bit more complicated - there are lots of ordertypes of ordinals in countable $\omega$-models of ZFC - but can still be handled similarly to the above.

Namely, any theory extending $ZFC$ has a model whose ordinals have ordertype $$\omega_1^{CK}+\omega_1^{CK}\cdot\eta,$$ where $\omega_1^{CK}$ is the first nonrecursive ordinal; the ordertype above is called the Harrison order and is a standard counterexample in computable structure theory. So, again, pick a sentence $p$ which is true in some $\omega$-models of ZFC+V=L and false in others (e.g. "There is an inaccessible cardinal"), and let $M, N$ be countable models of $ZFC+V=L$ whose ordinals each have ordertype the Harrison order, and $M\models p$ but $N\models\neg p$.


Finally, if we restrict attention to well-founded models, the answer is yes - if $M, N$ are transitive models with $ON^M=ON^N$, then by induction on $\alpha$ we have $L_\alpha^{M}=L_\alpha^N$ for every $\alpha\in ON^M$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ thank you.And if both models are omega models? $\endgroup$
    – luis
    Jan 28 '17 at 23:05
  • $\begingroup$ @luis See my edit. $\endgroup$ Jan 28 '17 at 23:12
  • $\begingroup$ @luis I fixed a silly ordertype mistake. $\endgroup$ Jan 29 '17 at 1:29
  • $\begingroup$ I mean, I shouldn't be writing comments around 4 am in Lapland. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    Jan 29 '17 at 7:19
  • $\begingroup$ Nice; in each case you prove the stronger there are $M$, $N$ with $M\not\equiv N$. This makes me think of the same question with the additional hypothesis of $M\equiv N$. $\endgroup$ Jan 29 '17 at 13:53

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.