bertalan bodor, joint work with peter cameron and csaba szab o · 2017. 9. 19. · in nitely many...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Infinitely many reducts of homogeneous structures
Bertalan Bodor,joint work with Peter Cameron and Csaba Szabó
TU Dresden
Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Structure: A = 〈A,C ,F ,R〉, where
A : underlying set
C : set of constants
F : set of functions An → AR : set of relations ⊂ An
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Structure: A = 〈A,C ,F ,R〉, where
A : underlying set
C : set of constants
F : set of functions An → AR : set of relations ⊂ An
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Structure: A = 〈A,C ,F ,R〉, where
A : underlying set
C : set of constants
F : set of functions An → AR : set of relations ⊂ An
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Structure: A = 〈A,C ,F ,R〉, where
A : underlying set
C : set of constants
F : set of functions An → A
R : set of relations ⊂ An
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Structure: A = 〈A,C ,F ,R〉, where
A : underlying set
C : set of constants
F : set of functions An → AR : set of relations ⊂ An
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Reducts
Reduct of a structure A: another structure on the same domain set;contants, functions and relations are definable in A.
Two reduct are called interdefinable iff they are reducts of one another.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Basic concepts
Reducts
Reduct of a structure A: another structure on the same domain set;contants, functions and relations are definable in A.
Two reduct are called interdefinable iff they are reducts of one another.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection between
the reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection betweenthe reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Facts
Aut(A): closed in Sym(A).
If B is a reduct of A, then Aut(B) ⊃ Aut(A).
All structures: countable, ω-categorical
Definition
A is ω-categorical iff for all n Aut(A) has finitely many n-orbits.
Theorem (Ryll-Nardzewski, Engeler, Svenonius)
For ω-categorcial structures B 7→ Aut(B) is a bijection betweenthe reducts of A (up to interdefinability) and
the closed supergroups of Aut(A).
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
Aim in general
To classify all reducts of a structure A (up to interdefinability).
Algebraic formulation
By the previous theorem: it is enough to find all closed supergroups ofAut(A).
Solved for:
(Q,
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
All structures above: homogeneous over a finite relational language.
Definition
Homogeneous: every finite partial isomorphism can be extended to anautomorphism.
Conjecture (Thomas, 1991)
Every homogeneous, finite relational structure has finitely many reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
All structures above: homogeneous over a finite relational language.
Definition
Homogeneous: every finite partial isomorphism can be extended to anautomorphism.
Conjecture (Thomas, 1991)
Every homogeneous, finite relational structure has finitely many reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts and automorphism groups
All structures above: homogeneous over a finite relational language.
Definition
Homogeneous: every finite partial isomorphism can be extended to anautomorphism.
Conjecture (Thomas, 1991)
Every homogeneous, finite relational structure has finitely many reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.
Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:
Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).
Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.
n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.
Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
V = Fω2 : countably infinite dimensional vector space over F2
Difference: it is not homogeneous over a finite relational language.Proof:Suppose Aut(V) = Aut(V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk).Claim: (V ,R1,R2, . . . ,Rk) is not homogeneous.n > max(ar(Ri )), a1, a2, . . . , an linearly independent.Then ai 7→ ai : i < n, an 7→ a1 + a2 + · · ·+ an−1 does not extend to anautomorphism.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation
1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation
1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó) (Bossière, Bodirsky)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
Model theoretical formulation1 the vector space V itself
2 the countably infinite set
3 the countably infinitedimensional affine space
4 the countably infinite setwith a constant 0
Algebraic formulation
1 Aut(V), the automorphismgroup of V
2 Sym(V), the symmetricgroup
3 Aff(V) = Aut(V) n Tr, thegroup of affinetransformations on V
4 Sym(V)0, the stabilizer of 0in Sym(V)
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
What if we add a constant?
Theorem (B., Cameron, Szabó)
(V, c) has infinitely many reducts.
In fact: there exists an infinite ascending chain of reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
What if we add a constant?
Theorem (B., Cameron, Szabó)
(V, c) has infinitely many reducts.
In fact: there exists an infinite ascending chain of reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Reducts of the vector space
Theorem (B., Kalina, Szabó)
V = Fω2 has exactly 4 reducts.
What if we add a constant?
Theorem (B., Cameron, Szabó)
(V, c) has infinitely many reducts.
In fact: there exists an infinite ascending chain of reducts.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.
Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉
2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n
3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉
2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)
4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n
3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)
4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1
Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
We want: Aut(V, c) ≤ G0 < G1 < . . . closed groups.Construction:
1 V = W ⊕ 〈c〉2 Wn ≤W , codim(Wn) = n3 hn: flipping along Wn (u ↔ u + c iff u ∈Wn ⊕ 〈c〉)4 Gn = 〈Aut(V, c), hn〉
Observations:
Gn only depends on n.
Gn ⊂ Gn+1Why are they different?
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iff
x1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.
But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn.
Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1.
In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1.
In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)
hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.
Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1.
In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)
hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
The constructionAlgebraic description
Definition
(x1, . . . , x2n) ∈ Rn iffx1, x1 + c , . . . , x2n , x2n + c is a subspace
|{i : xi ∈W }| is even.
Remark
This is not a first-order definition.But! Aut(V, c) preserves Rn. Hence Rn is definable in (V, c).
hn preserves Rn+1. In fact: Gn = Aut(Rn+1)hn+1 does not preserve Rn+1.Consequence: Gn 6= Gn+1.
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fqcountable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fqcountable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fq
countable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fqcountable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fqcountable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)
modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Remarks, future work
Remarks:
this result shows the limits of Thomas’ Conjecture
the construction is related to Reed–Muller codes
the construction works over Fqcountable atomless Boolean algebra has infinitely many reducts
Future work:
find all the reducts of (V, c)modify construction to disprove Thomas’ Conjecture
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017
-
Thank you for your attention!
Bertalan Bodor (TU Dresden) Infinitely many reducts . . . Novi Sad, 17th June 2017