More on regular reduced products

Juliette Kennedy Department of Mathematics University of Helsinki Helsinki, Finland Saharon Shelah Institute of Mathematics Hebrew University Jerusalem, Israel

December 3, 2006

Abstract The authors show, by means of a nitary version f in of the com,D binatorial principle b of [7], the consistency of the failure, relative to the consistency of supercompact cardinals, of the following: for all regular lters D on a cardinal , if M i and Ni are elementarily equivalent models of a language of size , then the second player has a winning strategy in the Ehrenfeucht-Fra e game of length + ss = + and i < implies on i Mi /D and i Ni /D. If in addition 2 |Mi |+|Ni | + this means that the ultrapowers are isomorphic. This settles negatively conjecture 18 in [2].

modified:2006-12-03

revision:2006-11-30

The problem of when two elementarily equivalent structures have isomorphic ultrapowers was prominent in the model theory of the 1960s. Keisler [3] proved, assuming GCH, that elementarily equivalent structures have isomorphic ultrapowers. Keislers proof depended on GCH both on the question of existence of good ultralters and on limiting the size of the ultraproducts. More exactly, Keisler considered a language of size , models M of size + and a + -good countably incomplete ultralter D on . He proved that M /D is + -saturated. Under the weaker assumption that D is regular he
Research partially supported by grant 40734 of the Academy of Finland. The second author would like to thank the Israel Science Foundation for partial support of this research (Grant no. 242/03). Publication 852.

852

proved that M /D is + -universal, i.e. every N M /D of cardinality can be elementarily embedded into it. Shelah [6] improved the result by eliminating GCH: two structures M and N are elementarily equivalent if and only if, for some and some regular ultralter D on the structures M /D and N /D are isomorphic. This left open the following question, asked by Chang and Keisler as Conjecture 18 in [2]: Let M and N be structures of cardinality in a language of size and let D be a regular ultralter over . If M N , then M /D N /D. = The question is a natural one as most of the model theory regarding ultrapowers is centered on the regular ultralters. Also at the time of Keislers question GCH was generally assumed, a reasonable assumption for the question. Also the Conjecture is formulated for models of size , perhaps for accidental reasons, but it seems more natural if M and N have cardinality + . Conjecture 19 of [2], which we also address in this paper, is: If D is a regular ultralter over , then for all innite M , M /D is ++ -universal. In [5] the authors proved that the transfer principle (1 , 0 ) (+ , ) implies for all regular lters D on (1)D For all M in a language of size , M /D is ++ -universal. (2)D If Mi and Ni are elementarily equivalent models of a language of size , then the second player has a winning strategy in the EhrenfeuchtFra e game of length + on i Mi /D and i Ni /D. ss

modified:2006-12-03

revision:2006-11-30

Assuming 2 = + , (2)D yields the following corollary (2 )D For Mi , Ni as in (2)D of cardinality + ,

i

Mi /D =

Ni /D.

We note that regularity is necessary for (1D ). I.e. Lemma 1 For any lter D on an innite cardinal , if for all innite N the structure N /D is ++ -universal, then D is regular. 2

852

Proof. For k = 1, 2 let Mk = Mk , Pik i< , where M1 = , M2 = + 1 and the Pik are dened as follows. Let k = 1 and let D0 be a regular lter on . Let {Ai } D0 witness the regularity of D0 . Thus for < , {i < | Ai } is nite. Set Pi1 = Ai . Now let k = 2. Let Pi2 = Ai {}. Now let D be any ultralter on and suppose there is an elementary embedding g mapping 1 M2 into M1 /D. Let g() = [f ] and let X = {i|f (i) P }. For each 2 < , a P implies X D. It is easy to see that {X }< is a regular family in D. 2 We note that a similar argument can be used to show that (1)D fails if the language of M has size + . This was a partial answer to the above Conjectures 18 and 19. In this paper we show the converse for singular strong limit . Under GCH this is necessary as by Changs Two Cardinal Theorem the transfer principle (1 , 0 ) (+ , ) can only fail, in the presence of GCH, for singular . It is known that (1 , 0 ) (+1 , ) + GCH is consistent relative to the consistency of a supercompact cardinal [1]. It follows that the statement (2)D is independent of ZFC relative to the consistency of supercompact cardinals. On the other hand (1 , 0 ) (+ , ) holds for all if V = L. In fact we show more. The results of [5] were obtained using a nitary version, denoted here by f in , of the combinatorial principle b from [7], ,D which is equivalent for all to (1 , 0 ) (+ , ). We showed in [5] that whenever is singular strong limit, f in is actually equivalent to b , using ,D Theorem 2.3 and Remark 2.5 of [7]. Thus f in is equivalent to (1 , 0 ) ,D (+ , ), again for singular strong limit. The consistency of e.g. GCH+ b follows. Precisely we showed: Lemma 2 Let D be a regular lter on where is a singular strong limit cardinal. Then f in implies b . ,D The nal piece needed for obtaining the transfer principle from (1)D , (2)D and (2 )D for singular strong limit involves proving their equivalence with the principle f in , which equivalence is proved for all (Theorem 4). ,D We note that (2)D is more robust than what was originally conjectured, i.e. we have given a condition on when player II has a winning strategy in the EF game of length + on the two structures i Mi /D and i Ni /D. Thus again if is singular strong limit, then the model theoretic (1)D and (2)D are equivalent to the set theoretic (1 , 0 ) (+ , ). We need the following denition, from Lemma 4 of [5]: 3

852

revision:2006-11-30

modified:2006-12-03

Denition 3 Let D be a regular lter on . If there exist sets u and integers i ni for each < + and i < such that for each i, (i) |u | < ni i (ii) u i (iii) Let B be a nite set of ordinals and let be such that B < + . Then {i : B u } D i (iv) Coherence: u u = u , i i i then we say that Our main result: Theorem 4 Assume 0 and D is a regular lter on . Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i)
f in ,D . f in ,D

holds.

modified:2006-12-03

(ii) If Mi and Ni are elementarily equivalent models of a language of cardinality , then the second player has a winning strategy in the Ehrenfeucht-Frass game of length + on i Mi /D and i Ni /D. e (iii) If M and N are structures of a language of cardinality , N M /D and |N | + , then there is a homomorphism 1 N M /D. (iv) If is a set of quantier-free formulas and M /D satises every existential -sentence (i.e. a sentence of the form x(1 ... n ), where each i is in ) true in N , |N | + , then there is a -homomorphism N M /D, i.e. a homomorphism N M /D which preserves formulas. Additionally, if D is an ultralter, then (i) (iv) are equivalent to (v) If M is a structure in a language of cardinality , then M /D is ++ -universal.
1

revision:2006-11-30

I.e. a mapping N M /D which respects the functions and relations of N .

852

Proof. (i) (ii), (i) (iii) and (i) (iv) follow from the -existential version of Theorem 2 of [5] which gives a -homomorphism of N into M /D for any set of rst-order formulas such that every -existential sentence true in N is true in M . If D is an ultralter, [5] gives (i) (v) and, on the other hand, (v) (iii) is straightforward. (ii) (iii): It follows from N M /D that there are M0 M and a homomorphism N M0 such that M0 has cardinality + . By (ii) the second player has a winning strategy in the Ehrenfeucht-Fra e game of ss + length on M0 /D and M /D. Using this winning strategy we get easily a homomorphism N M /D. (iii) (iv): Let M and N be as in (iv). Let N be an expansion of N obtained by giving a name to every -denable relation. Let (M /D) be obtained similarly from M /D. Let M0 (M /D) such that there is a homomorphism N M0 . (The existence of such M0 follows from the fact that we can nd M0 (M ) /D and a homomorphism N M0 . But then (M ) /D is canonically embeddable into (M /D) ). By (iii) there is a homomorphism M0 M /D. Thus there is a -homomorphism N M /D. (iv) (i): Let , D be given and let denote a language of cardinality . It suces to prove the following Claim. There exist M, N such that
modified:2006-12-03

a) |M | = , |N | = + b) M = N and |N | c) M N d) For = the quantier free formulas of M , N has a -homomorphism into M /D, and hence f in holds. ,D Proof. Let = {F | < } {<}, for F a unary function symbol. Let K be the family of all structures M such that K1) M is a nite -structure. K2) The universe of M is {0, 1, . . . , k 1}, for some k N, denoted (M ). K3) M |= x(F (x) x) for all < . 5

852

revision:2006-11-30

M M K4) If m1 = F1 (m), m2 = F2 (m) and m1 < m2 , then there exists a M unique < such that m1 = F (m2 ). M M K5) If F2 (m3 ) = m2 , F1 (m2 ) = m1 and m1 < m2 < m3 , then there M exists 3 < such that F3 (m3 ) = m1 .

M K6) w(M ) =df { | F is not the identity} is nite.

We note that K is non-empty, taking K to be, e.g., a one element structure. Let {Mi | i < } list K. We will add the Mi together into one structure. I.e., we dene a model M for = {E} such that aK ) The universe of M = {{i} Mi | i < } bK ) E M = { (i1 , m1 ), (i2 , m2 ) | m1 < (Mi1 ), m2 < (Mi2 ) and i1 = i2 } cK ) <M = { (i, m1 ), (i, m2 ) | m1 < m2 < (Mi )}

M M dK ) F (i, m) = i, F i (m) .

Now for < + let h be a partial one to one function from onto , and let a | < + be a set of new constant symbols. Subclaim: There is N such that
modified:2006-12-03

a) N is a structure of cardinality + , where = {a | < + } {m}mM , b) M

c) a E N a0 for < + , d) a <N a , for < < + ,

revision:2006-11-30

e) N |= Fj ( ) = a , if h (j) = , for j < and < < + ; if , j are a such that h (j) is undened, let Fj be the identity on a . Proof of the Subclaim. We rst introduce the following notation: for < < + if h (i) = then let i( , ) < denote the unique value i. Let T = T h(M, m)mM {a Ea0 }<+ {a < a | < < + } {Fj (a ) = a | h (j) = }. We claim that T is consistent. To see this, let T0 = {i (m)}i=1,...,n {ai Ea0 }i=1,...k {a i < ai }i=1,...,l {Fi (ai ) = ai |hi (i ) = 6

852

i }i=1,...,m be a nite part of T , where ai1 , . . . , aik and mj1 , . . . , mjl are all the parameters occurring in T0 . Let I0 = {i | for some j = j1 . . . , jl , mj = (i, a), i < , a < (Mi )}. We can nd Mi0 , i0 I0 , such that if we interpret the constants a in Mi0 and mji by mji M , then this expansion of M is a model of T0 and thus T0 is consistent. The Subclaim is proved. Now let N be as in claim 1 and let N = N M . We note that the pair of structures N together with the M dened above satisfying aK ) dK ), satisfy the hypothesis of Theorem 2-(iv), i.e. (M ) /D satises every existential -sentence true in N where = the quantier-free formulas of M . This is because N M and these -sentences are preserved under reduced products. Therefore by (iv) there is a -homomorphism g : N (M ) /D. Let g(a ) be denoted by f /D. We are now ready to dene the sets u referred to in (i)-(iv) of the coni dition f in . To this end, for < < + , , dene ,D A , = {j < | M |= (f (j) > f (j)) Fi( ,) (f (j)) = f (j)}, where i( , ) < denotes the unique value i, for < < + and h (i) = . Note that if < < + , , then A , D, since (M ) /D |= (g(a ) < g(a )) Fi( ,) (g(a )) = g(a ). For each (, + ) and j dene
modified:2006-12-03

W,j = { < | and j A , }. We claim that if u =df W,j then j

f in ,D

holds.

revision:2006-11-30

Proof of Claim. First note that under the -homomorphism g : N (M ) /D, if M j (= M ) is the j-th component of the reduced product (M ) /D, then there is a unique i0 = i0 (j), i0 < , such that each image element f (j)/D belongs to the same equivalence class i0 Mi0 of M . This justies introducing the following notation for the proofs of (i)-(ii) and (iv) of f in : for xed j and i0 = i0 (j) as above, if f (j) = (i0 , m(i0 , )), denote ,D m(i0 , ) by f (j) itself. (i), (ii): W,j is a nite subset of : { < | and j A , } = { < | and M |= Fi( ,) (f (j)) = f (j)}
i0 = { < | and Mi0 |= Fi( ,) (f (j)) = f (j)}.

But w(Mi0 ) is nite, and therefore so is W,j . Thus if ni is taken to be w(Mio ) then (i) and (ii) of f in are satised. ,D 7

852

(iv): (coherency) holds of W,j , i.e. if 1 < 2 < + and j < is given, if 1 W2 ,j then W1 ,j = W2 ,j 1 . Why? Let W1 ,j . Then < 2 and j A,1 . But then M |= Fi(,1 ) (f1 (j)) = f (j) and therefore M i0 Mi0 |= Fi(,1 ) (f1 (j)) = f (j). (Recall that we let fi (j) stand for both the element of M and of Mi0 .) 1 W2 ,j and therefore j A1 ,2 . This means Mi Mi0 |= Fi(10,2 ) (f2 (j)) = f1 (j). By the denition of Mi0 , there is such that Mi0 |= F i0 (f2 (j)) = f (j). But = i(, 2 ) and j A,2 and therefore W2 ,j . For the other direction suppose W2 ,j 1 . Then M i0 and j A,2 , i.e. Mi0 |= Fi(,2 ) (f2 (j)) = f (j). 1 W2 ,j means that as before j A1 ,2 , i.e. Mi0 |= Fi(i10,2 ) (f2 (j)) = f1 (j). But then since < 1 , there is such that Mi0 |= F 0 (f1 (j)) = f (j), i.e. as before j A1 ,j and W1 ,j . To see that (iii) is satised, let B + be a nite set of ordinals such that B = , and let be such that B < + . We wish to show that {j | B W,j } D. Let B = {j1 , . . . , jn }. Recall that by (e) of the subclaim, N |= Fi(j,) (a ) = aj whence Ck = {i | M |= Fi(jk ,) (f (i)) = fjk (i)} D, for each k = 1, . . . , n. Also by denition if i Ck then i Ajk , whence jk W,i . Thus C1 Cn {j | B W,j } D. Now if we transfer the sets u , < + to all of + , (iv) implies (i), j proving the Claim. Thus Theorem 2 is proved. Corollary 5 Assume 0 , 2 = + and D is a regular lter on . Then the following are equivalent: (i)
f in ,D . Mi M M

modified:2006-12-03

revision:2006-11-30

(ii) If Mi and Ni , i < , are elementarily equivalent models of a language of cardinality , and |Mi |, |Ni | + then i Mi /D i Ni /D. = Corollary 6 GCH + the failure of properties (i)-(iv) of Theorem 4 for = is consistent relative to the consistency of supercompact cardinals. Proof. Assume GCH and (1 , 0 ) (+1 , ). It is well-known (cf. [2] Proposition 4.3.5) that there is a regular lter D on generated by sets. 8

852

The principle b fails. Thus for the regular lter D. 2

f in ,D

fails by [5]. By Theorem 4, (i)-(iv) fail

A drawback of Corollary 6 is that it deals with lters rather than ultralters, which was originally the most interesting case. This case will be dealt with in a work in preparation.

References
[1] S. Ben-David, On Shelahs compactness of cardinals, Israel J. Math, 31, 1978, 3456, [2] C.C. Chang and J.Keisler, Model Theory, North-Holland. [3] J. Keisler, Ultraproducts and saturated models. Nederl.Akad.Wetensch. Proc. Ser. A 67 (=Indag. Math. 26) (1964), 178-186. [4] J. Kennedy and S. Shelah, On embedding models of arithmetic of cardinality 1 into reduced powers, Fundamenta Mathematicae, Volume 176, Issue 1, 2003, 1724. [5] J. Kennedy and S. Shelah, On regular reduced products. Journal of Symbolic Logic, Volume 67, 2002, 11691177.
modified:2006-12-03

[6] S. Shelah, Every two elementarily equivalent models have isomorphic ultrapowers, Israel J. Math., 10, 1971, 224233, [7] S. Shelah, Gap 1 two-cardinal principles and the omitting types theorem for L(Q). Israel Journal of Mathematics vol 65 no. 2,1989, 133152.

revision:2006-11-30

852