On -definable elements in a field

Abstract

Let K be a field and K denote the set of all r ∈ K for which there exists a finite set A(r) with r ⊂eq A(r) ⊂eq K such that each mapping f:A(r) K that satisfies: if 1 ∈ A(r) then f(1)=1, if a,b ∈ A(r) and a+b ∈ A(r) then f(a+b)=f(a)+f(b), if a,b ∈ A(r) and a · b ∈ A(r) then f(a · b)=f(a) · f(b), satisfies also f(r)=r. We prove: K is a subfield of K, K=x ∈ K: x is existentially first-order definable in the language of rings without parameters, if some subfield of K is algebraically closed then K is the prime field in K, some elements of K are transcendental over Q (over R, over Qp) for a large class of fields K that are finitely generated over Q (that extend R, that extend Qp), if K is a Pythagorean subfield of R, t is transcendental over K, and r ∈ K is recursively approximable, then r is -definable in (K(t),+,·,0,1), if a real number r is recursively approximable then r is existentially -definable in (R,+,·,0,1,U) for some unary predicate U which is implicitly -definable in (R,+,·,0,1).

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…