Dependent dreams: recounting types
Abstract
We investigate the class of models of a general dependent theory. We continue math.LO/0702292 in particular investigating so called "decomposition of types"; thesis is that what holds for stable theory and for Th(Q,<) hold for dependent theories. Another way to say this is: we have to look at small enough neighborhood and use reasonably definable types to analyze a type. We note the results understable without reading. First, a parallel to the "stability spectrum", the "recounting of types", that is assume lambda = lambda< lambda is large enough, M a saturated model of T of cardinality lambda, let bold Saut(M) be the number of complete types over M up to being conjugate, i.e. we identify p,q when some automorphism of M maps p to q . Whereas for independent T the number is 2lambda, for dependent T the number is <= lambda moreover it is <= | alpha ||T| when lambda = alephalpha. Second, for stable theories "lots of indiscernibility exists" a "too good indiscernible existence theorem" saying, e.g. that if the type tp (dbeta ; dbeta : beta < alpha) is increasing for alpha < kappa = cf(kappa) and kappa > 2|T| then <dalpha : alpha in S> is indiscernible for some stationary S subseteq kappa. Third, for stable T,a model is kappa-saturated iff it is alephepsilon-saturated and every infinite indiscernible set (of elements) of cardinality < kappa can be increased. We prove here an analog. Fourth, for p in S(M), the number of ultrafilters on the outside definable subsets of M extending p has an absolute bound 2|T| . Restricting ourselves to one phi(x, y), the number is finite, with an absolute found (well depending on T and phi).
Turn this paper into a lesson
ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.