Difference between revisions of "Cuts in models of PA and independence results"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
By recent results of Kaye and Tin Lok Wong, every countable recursively saturated $M$ has $K$ and $L$ as in the question, such that $(M,K)\not\cong (M,L)$. | By recent results of Kaye and Tin Lok Wong, every countable recursively saturated $M$ has $K$ and $L$ as in the question, such that $(M,K)\not\cong (M,L)$. | ||
| − | + | Several results related to the problem can be found in <cite>kossak1985:anoteon, kayetinlokwong2010:truth </cite>, | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
Smoryński, C. ''Elementary extensions of recursively saturated models of arithmetic''. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 22 (1981), no. 3, 193–203. | Smoryński, C. ''Elementary extensions of recursively saturated models of arithmetic''. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 22 (1981), no. 3, 193–203. | ||
Revision as of 17:03, 20 January 2013
Diversity in elementary cuts
Let $M\models PA$ be countable and recursively saturated.
Smorybski proved that here are $2^{\aleph_0}$ theories of pairs $(M,K)$, such that $K$ is not semiregular in $M$.
Kossak proved that there are $2^{\aleph_0}$ theories of pairs $(M,K)$, such that $K$ is strong in $M$.
Problem: How many theories of pairs $(M,K)$ are there, such that $K$ is semiregular, but not regular in $M$.
By recent results of Kaye and Tin Lok Wong, every countable recursively saturated $M$ has $K$ and $L$ as in the question, such that $(M,K)\not\cong (M,L)$.
Several results related to the problem can be found in [1, 2],
Smoryński, C. Elementary extensions of recursively saturated models of arithmetic. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 22 (1981), no. 3, 193–203.
Smoryński, C. A note on initial segment constructions in recursively saturated models of arithmetic. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 23 (1982), no. 4, 393–408
Kossak, Roman A note on satisfaction classes. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 26 (1985), no. 1, 1–8.
Kaye, Richard; Wong, Tin Lok Truth in generic cuts. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 161 (2010), no. 8, 987–1005.
