Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:34:51.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pseudoprojective strongly minimal sets are locally projective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Steven Buechler
Steven Buechler*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
*
Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana 46556
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Let D be a strongly minimal set in the language L, and D′ ⊃ D an elementary extension with infinite dimension over D. Add to L a unary predicate symbol D and let T′ be the theory of the structure (D′, D), where D interprets the predicate D. It is known that T′ is ω-stable. We prove

Theorem A. If D is not locally modular, then T′ has Morley rank ω.

We say that a strongly minimal set D is pseudoprojective if it is nontrivial and there is a k < ω such that, for all a, b ∈ D and closed X ⊂ D, a ∈ cl(Xb) ⇒ there is a Y ⊂ X with a ∈ cl(Yb) and ∣Y∣ ≤ k. Using Theorem A, we prove

Theorem B. If a strongly minimal set D is pseudoprojective, then D is locally projective.

The following result of Hrushovski's (proved in §4) plays a part in the proof of Theorem B.

Theorem C. Suppose that D is strongly minimal, and there is some proper elementary extension D1 of D such that the theory of the pair (D1, D) is ω1-categorical. Then D is locally modular.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , December 1991 , pp. 1184 - 1194
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[AR]Ash, C. and Rosenthal, J., Intersections of algebraically closed fields, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 30 (1986), pp. 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[B1]Buechler, S., “Geometrical” stability theory, Logic Colloquium '85, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1987, pp. 53–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[B2]Buechler, S., Locally modular theories of finite rank, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 30 (1986), pp. 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[B3]Buechler, S., Geometry of weakly minimal types, this Journal, vol. 50 (1985), pp. 1044–1053.Google Scholar
[Bo]Bouscaren, E., Dimensional order property and pairs of models, Thèse de Doctorat d'État, Université Paris-VII, Paris, 1985. See also Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, vol. 41 (1989), pp. 205–231.Google Scholar
[CS]Cherlin, G. and Shelah, S., Superstable fields and groups, Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 18 (1980), pp. 227–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Hr]Hrushovski, E., Contributions to stable model theory, Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, California, 1986.Google Scholar
[Hr1]Hrushovski, E., Kueker's conjecture for stable theories, this Journal, vol. 54 (1989), pp. 207–220.Google Scholar
[L1]Lascar, D., Ranks and definability in superstable theories, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 23 (1976), pp. 53–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[L2]Lascar, D., Relation entre le rang U et le poids, Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 121 (1984), pp. 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Lo]Loveys, J., Locally finite weakly minimal theories, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic (to appear).Google Scholar
[M]Makkai, M., A survey of basic stability theory, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 49 (1984), pp. 181–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[P1]Pillay, A., Simple superstable theories, Classification theory (proceedings, Chicago, 1985), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1292, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987, pp. 247–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Po]Poizat, B., Paires de structures stables, this Journal, vol. 48 (1983), pp. 239–249.Google Scholar
[Po1]Poizat, B., Review of [Z4], Mathematical Reviews 82m:03045.Google Scholar
[Po2]Poizat, B., Groupes stables, Nur al-Mantiq wal-Ma'rifah, Villeurbanne, 1987.Google Scholar
[Sa]Saffe, J., On categorical theories, Logic Colloquium '84, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1986, pp. 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Z1]Zil'ber, B. I., The structure of models of uncountably categorical theories, Proceedings of the international congress of mathematicians (Warsaw, 1983), Vol. 1, PWN, Warsaw, and North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, pp. 359–368.Google Scholar
[Z2]Zil'ber, B. I., Strongly minimal countably categorical theories. II, Siberian Mathematical Journal, vol. 25 (1984), pp. 396–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Z3]Zil'ber, B. I., Some model theory of simple algebraic groups over algebraically closed fields, Colloquium Mathematicum, vol. 48 (1984), pp. 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Z4]Zil'ber, B. I., Totally categorical theories: structural properties and the nonfinite axiomatizability, Model theory of algebra and arithmetic (proceedings, Karpacz, 1979), Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 834, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980, pp. 381–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar