[FOM] Shipman's field question
T.Forster at dpmms.cam.ac.uk
Wed Oct 25 16:44:18 EDT 2006
I recently spent an evening with a friend who had an Executive Toy in the
form of ball-and-stick gadgets for making toy models of chemicals. It
occurred to me that the question of whether or not these structures are
rigid ( = not deformable) is not obviously trivial. Is this something on
which the (decidable) first-order theory of the reals as an ordered field
has anything amusing to say...?
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Dave Marker wrote:
> Joe Shipman asks:
> > What is interesting about the real and p-adic fields is that they are
> > elementarily equivalent to their algebraic subfields (that is, to the
> > subfields consisting of those elements which satisfy a polynomial
> > equation with integer coefficients).
> > What model-theoretic property of these fields is responsible for this
> One answer is that the real field is model complete
> in the language of fields (while having quantifier elimination in
> slightly richer languages). So by the Tarski-Vaught test
> the set of algebraic elements will be an elementary submodel.
> To say a bit more about your original question.
> Tom Scanlon (building on work of Pop, Poonen and others) has
> recently proved that if K is a finitely generated field, there is a
> sentence describing K up to isomorphism among the finitely generated
> fields. In particular, this proves Pop's conjecture that elementarily
> equivalent finitely generated fields are isomorphic.
> Dave Marker
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~tf; Home phone +44-1223-704452.
work: +44-1223-227981. Mobile in UK +44-7887-701-562
More information about the FOM