3
$\begingroup$

Let $P\subseteq \mathbb{N}$ be the set of primes, and suppose $Q\subseteq P$ is some subset. Prove that $PA$ has a model $M$ with an element $m$, such that $M\models q\mid m$ for ever $q\in Q$ and $M\models \neg p\mid m$ for every $p\in Q-P$

PA is Peano Axioms.

So I believe I want $\Gamma:= PA\cup \{q\mid m: q\in Q\}$

Then taking any sub theory of $\Gamma$ I have some finite set of $\{q_1\mid m, q_2\mid m,...,q_k\mid m\}$

Which I understand can be taken to be prime factors of some $m$, but there isn't an $m$ which is the product of infinitely many primes. Which makes it seem like there can't be a single $m$ which satisfies any finite subset.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ use compactness. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 5:32
  • $\begingroup$ (Also, what is a context set? A domain? Also, $Q$ might be infinite so there's no product of the primes in $Q.$) $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 5:37
  • $\begingroup$ @spaceisdarkgreen So just take $m$ to be the product of all the primes? Then any finite subset of $Q$ this will be true? Can I make $m$ an infinite product though? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 5:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ No. Think about how you use the compactness theorem to show there is a model of PA with an element $m$ such that $m>n$ for every $n\in \mathbb N$. You start by adding a constant symbol, and then prove some collection of new axioms involving that symbol is finitely satisfiable. This works in a similar way. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 5:40
  • $\begingroup$ @spaceisdarkgreen But I need a collection of $q\mid m$ for every $q$ right? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 8:05

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

Add a constant symbol $c$ the language and consider the theory consisting of PA plus $$ \{\mathbf q\mid c:q\in Q\}\cup\{\mathbf p\not\mid c:p\in P-Q\}$$ where the boldface denotes the numeral (so to be clear about what language we’re in and that we aren’t mixing syntax and semantics).

This theory is finitely satisfiable: use use the usual interpretation in the naturals and interpret $c$ as the product of all the $q\in Q$ such that $\mathbf q\mid c$ appears in the finite subtheory under consideration.

Thus by the compactness theorem, the theory has a model. Then let $m$ be the interpretation of $c$ in that model.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .