3
$\begingroup$

Marker proves in "Model Theory" that for an $\omega$-stable group, $G$, if it is connected then it has a unique generic type. I'm trying to understand the proof.

The proof goes like this: Let $p,q$ be distinct generic types. We will get a contradiction by showing that if $a$ and $b$ are independent realizations of $p$ and $q$, then $ba$ realizes both $p$ and $q$.

Let $G_1$ be an elementary extension of $G$ containing $b$. Let $p_1\in G_1$ be the unique nonforking extension of $p$ and let $a_1$ realize $p_1$. Because $a_1$ and $a$ both realize the unique nonforking extension of $p$ to $G\cup \{b\}$, $$tp(a,b/G)=tp(a_1,b/G).$$ Because $G_1$ is connected and $p_1$ is a generic type of $G_1$ then $\operatorname{Stab}(p_1)=G_1$. Thus, $ba_1$ realizes $p_1$. In particular, $ba_1$ realizes $p$ and hence $ba$ realizes $p$.

I have a few questions:

  1. How can we know that $a,b$ exist? For two types $p,q$ how do we know that independent realizations exist?

  2. Where did we use the independence? Was it in order to know that there exits a nonforking extension of $p$ to $G\cup \{b\}$? Don't we get that from the $\omega $-stable‍ness?

  3. And a different question: if $a\in G$, can we always find a $b\in G$ that is generic over $a$? If so-why?

Thanks, Yatir

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$
  1. (this works in stable/simple theories in general if $p,q$ are out of the same S(C)) pick any realisation of $a$ of $p$. now extend $q$ to some non-forking-type $q_1$ out of $S(Ca)$. Now any realisation of $q_1$ gives you $b$ independent of $a$ or in this case vice versa.
  2. independence is needed to know that $tp(a,b/G)=tp(a_1,b/G)$, because it is a unique nf-extension (forget b because is in G)
  3. isn't generic the same as independent so it is answered by 1
$\endgroup$

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.