Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
r
X
i
v
:
m
a
t
h
/
0
6
0
3
6
5
2
v
1
[
m
a
t
h
.
L
O
]
2
8
M
a
r
2
0
0
6
MINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP
FOR DEPENDENT THEORIES
Saharon Shelah
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Einstein Institute of Mathematics
Edmond J. Safra Campus, Givat Ram
Jerusalem 91904, Israel
Department of Mathematics
Hill Center-Busch Campus
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
110 Frelinghuysen Road
Piscataway, NJ 08854-8019 USA
Abstract. For a dependent theory T, in C
T
for every type denable group G,
the intersection of type denable subgroups with bounded index is a type denable
subgroup with bounded index.
The author would like to thank the Israel Science Foundation for partial support of this research
(Grant No. 242/03), Publication 876
I would like to thank Alice Leonhardt for the beautiful typing.
First Typed - 05/Mar/28
Latest Revision - 06/Jan/11
Typeset by A
M
S-T
E
X
1
2 SAHARON SHELAH
0 Introduction
Assume that T is a dependent (complete rst order) theory C is a -saturated
model of T (a monster) G is a type denable (in C) group in C (of course we consider
only types of cardinality < ).
A type denable subgroup H of G is call bounded if the index (G : H) is < .
We prove that there is a minimal bounded denable subgroup. The rst theorem
on this line for T stable is of Baldwin-Saxe [BaSx76].
Recently Hrushovski, Peterzil and Pillay [HPP0x] investigated denable groups,
0-minimality and measure, see also the earlier work on denable subgroups in 0-
minimal T in Bezarducci, Otero, Peterzil and Pillay.
Hrushovski in a lecture in the logic seminar in the Hebrew University mentioned
that for every denable group in C
T
, the intersection of the denable subgroup
with bounded index is of bounded index is proved in [HPP0x] for denable groups
with suitable denable measure on them and T dependent; but it is not clear if the
existence of denable measure is necessary.
Recent works of the author on dependent theories are [Sh 783] (see 3,4 on
groups) [Sh 863] (e.g. the rst order theory of the peadics is strongly
1
dependent
but not strongly
2
dependent, see end of 1; on strongly
2
dependent elds see 5) and
[Sh:F705]. This work is continued in [Sh:F753] (for G abelian and L
,
-denable
subgroups).
MINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP FOR DEPENDENT THEORIES 3
1
1.1 Lemma. For T dependent.
1) If below holds then:
() q(C) is a subgroup of p(C)
() q(C) is of index 2
|T|
0
() essentially q(x)p(x) is of cardinality [T[
0
(i.e., for some q
(x) q(x)
of cardinality [T[
0
, q(x) is equivalent to p(x) q
(x)).
where
(a) p(x) is a type such that p(C) is a group we call G (under some denable
operation xy, x
1
and the identity e
G
which are constant here;
of course all types are of cardinality < , C is -saturated)
(b) q(x) = p(x)
[
[T[ +[Dom(p)[. So (p(C) : q(C)) 2
|Dom(p)|+|T|
.
3) If r
i
(x) R for i < ([T[
0
)
+
then for some < ([T[
0
)
+
we have (p(x)
r
i
(x) : i < )(C) = (p(x)
r
i
(x) : i < ([T[
0
)
+
)(C).
Proof. 1) Note
1
R is closed under unions of < hence q
q [q
[ < q
2
if r(x) R, r
(x) r(x)
including r
(x) =
n
(x, a
n
) : n < (can use
n
= (x = x)). Without
loss of generality r(x) is closed under conjuctions and also r
(x). Now we
choose
n
(x,
b
n
) =
1
n
(x,
b
1
n
)
2
n
(x,
b
2
n
) with
1
n
(x,
b
1
n
) r(x),
2
n
(x,
b
2
n
)
p(x) by induction on n < such that
n+1
(x,
b
n+1
)
n+1
(y,
b
n+1
)
n
(xy
1
,
b
n
)
n
(x, a
n
). Such formula exists as (p(x)r(x))(p(y)r(y))
n
(xy
1
,
b
n
)
n
(x, a
n
).
Now r
(x) =
n
(x, a
n
),
n
(x,
b
n
) : n < is as required.]
Clause () is obvious.
Assume toward contradiction that the conclusion () fails. So we can choose
(c
, r
0
)
+
such that
4 SAHARON SHELAH
3
(a) c
(p(x)
: < )(C)q(C)
(b) r
n
(x,
n
) : n < q and
b
n+1
(c)
n+1
(x,
n+1
)
n
(x,
n
)
(d) r
R
(e) c
in fact C [=
0
(c
0
).
Without loss of generality
n+1
(x, y
n+1
)
n
(x, y
n
) and (
n+1
(x
1
, y
n+1
)
n+1
(x
2
, y
n+1
)) (
n+1
(e, y
n+1
)
n+1
(x
1
x
1
2
, y
n+1
))
n
(x, y
n
) =
n
(x, y
n
) and
n+1
(x, y
n+1
))
n
(x, y
n
).
6
c
: < ([T[
0
)
+
is an indiscernible sequence over Dom(p) where a
2
. . . , without loss of generality
n
= a
k
n
[Why? By Ramsey theorem and compactness.]
7
if < < then c
c
1
(C).
[Why? Without loss of generality is innite, as (p r
)(C) is a subgroup
of p(C) of index < . If , c
i
: i < ) is a sequence of indiscernibles
over Dom(p)
=
(p r
c
1
/ G
c
1
/ G
so
c
: < ) pairwise
distinct) contradiction.]
8
c
(C) i ,= .
[Why? Let
c
= c
2+1
(c
2
)
1
r
= r
2
.
So:
(i) if < , c
(p r
)(C) as c
2+1
, c
2
belong to the subgroup (p
r
2+1
)(C) by clause (a) of
3
(ii) if > , c
belongs to (p r
)(C) by
7
(iii) if = then c
)(C) as it is a subgroup,
c
2+1
belongs to it and c
2
does not belong to it by clause (e) of
3
.
MINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP FOR DEPENDENT THEORIES 5
Let a
= a
2+1
,
n
=
b
2
n
retaining the same s. So we have gotten an example
as required in
8
(not losing the other demands).]
9
if d
1
, d
2
(p r
)(C) then d
1
c
d
2
/
1
(C,
1
).
[Why? Fix , if this holds for some
n
(,
n
) by indiscernibility renaming
the
i
s this is O.K. Otherwise for each n < there are d
n
1
, d
n
2
(pr
)(C)
such that C [=
n
(d
n
1
c
d
n
2
,
n
). By compactness for some d
1
, d
2
(p
r
)(C) we have [=
n
[d
1
c
2
,
n
] for every n < . So d
1
c
2
belongs to
the subgroup (p r
1
, d
2
belongs to it hence c
belongs,
contradiction.]
10
if w = i
1
, . . . , i
n
, i
1
< . . . < i
n
< (2
|T|
)
+
, and d
w
:= c
i
1
c
i
2
. . . c
i
n
then
[=
1
[d
w
,
b
1
] / w.
[Why? If w let k be such that = i
k
, so (c
i
1
, . . . , c
i
k1
) (pr
)(C) by
7
and c
i
k+1
. . . c
i
n
(p r
)(C) hence d
w
= (c
i
1
. . . c
i
k
)c
i
k
(c
i
k+1
. . . c
i
n
) /
(p r
)(C) by
9
.
Second, if / w by
8
as c
i
)(C).]
So we get a contradiction to T dependent hence clause () holds. Also clause ()
follows by the following observation:
Observation. If r(x) R and [r(x)[ then (p(C) : (p r)(C)) 2
(except nite
when is nite).
Proof. 1) If is nite then by compactness. If is innite then without loss of
generality r is closed under conjunctions. Let r =
i
(x,
b) : i < ,
b is possibly
innite.
For each i < let u ord be such that > [u[ > (p(C) : (p r)(C)) let
i,u
= p(x
) : u
i
(x
x
1
,
b) : < from u. So for some nite
u
i
u,
i,u
i
is contradictory so
i,n
i
is contradictory when n
i
= [u
i
[. It suces to
use (2
)
+
(. . . n
i
. . . )
i<
(why? let c
: < (2
)
+
) exemplify the failure and let
,
= Mini :[=
i
(c
c
1
,
b)).
2) Observe that every automorphism of C xing Dom(p) maps p(C) onto itself and
therefore maps q(C) onto itself.
It follows that if c
1
, c
2
p(C) are such that tp(c
1
, Dom(p)) = tp(c
2
, Dom(p))
then c
1
q(C) if and only if c
2
q(C). Let P := tp(b/Dom(p))[b q(C), P(C) :=
r(C) : r P. Then by the above explanation P(C) q(C). By denition
q(C) p(C) so they are equal. Let q
= r : r P then q(C) q
(C)).
If they are equal then we are done. Otherwise take c
1
q
(C)q(C). Without
loss of generality let (x,
d) q be such that [= (c
1
,
d).
6 SAHARON SHELAH
By denition of P and c
1
, for each (x, e) tp(c
1
, Dom(p)) there exists some
p
(x, e)
P such that (x, e) p
(x, e)
and therefore some c
(x, e)
q(C) realizes
(x, e). So tp(c
1
, dom(p)) q(x) is nitely satisable and is therefore realized by
some c
2
. Thus tp(c
1
, Dom(p)) = tp(c
2
, Dom(p)), but c
1
/ q(C) and c
2
q(C) a
contradiction.
3) By the proof of part (1).
1.1
MINIMAL BOUNDED INDEX SUBGROUP FOR DEPENDENT THEORIES 7
2
Claim. [T dependent] Assume
(a) G is a A
and a
i
: i < ) and B such that
() < ([T[
0
)
+
() tp( a
i
, A
) = tp( a, A
)
() q
= q
i
( x, a
i
) : i <
() B q
i
(C, a
i
) : i < and [B[ [[
() if a
realizes tp( a, A
) and B q(C, a
) then q
(C) q(C, a
).
Proof. We try to choose a
, b
realizes tp( a, A
)
(b) b
/ q(C, a
)
(c) b
realizes q(x, a
) for <
(d) b
realizes q(x, a
) for < .
If we succeed we get contradiction as in the proof in 1. If we are stuck at some
< ([T[
0
)
+
then take a
i
: i < ), B = b
i
: i < .
8 SAHARON SHELAH
REFERENCES.
[BaSx76] John T. Baldwin and Jan Saxl. Logical stability in group theory. J.
Austral. Math. Soc. Ser. A, 21:267276, 1976.
[HPP0x] Ehud Hrushovski, Yaacov Peterzil, and Anand Pillay. Denable groups,
o-minimality and measure. preprint.
[Sh:F753] Saharon Shelah. Denable Groups for Dependent Theories.
[Sh 783] Saharon Shelah. Dependent rst order theories, continued. Israel Journal
of Mathematic, accepted. math.LO/0406440.
[Sh 863] Saharon Shelah. Strongly dependent theories. Israel Journal of Mathe-
matics, submitted. math.LO/0504197.
[Sh:F705] Shelah, Saharon. Representation over orders of elementary classes.