Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:46:46.884Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The set theoretical foundations of nonstandard analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

N. C. K. Phillips*
Affiliation:
University of The Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

Extract

Nonstandard analysis was developed in [1] within a logic which has a language with finite types. In [2] and [3] the logic is first order and the language is that of set theory. The set theoretical approach can be described in the following setting.

Let be a relational structure (A, ∈) where A is a nonempty set and ∈ is a restriction of the elementhood relation of set theory.

Let Ext be the wf (∀x)[(∃w)[wx] → [(∀y)(∀z) [zxzy] → x = y]]. Call a fragment of set theory if ⊧ Ext. By forming a nontrivial ultrapower of one obtains a structure which, after canonically embedding in , becomes a proper elementary extension of .

Let j embed canonically in . Let be the substructure (B′, ∈′) of where B′ is the ∈′-closure of j(A) in B. That is, B′ is the smallest subset of B containing j(A) such that if bB, b′ ∈ B′ and bb′ then bB′.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1973

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

[1]Robinson, A., Nonstandard analysis, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1963.Google Scholar
[2]Robinson, A. and Zakon, E., A set-theoretical characterization of enlargements, Applications of model theory to algebra, analysis and probability (Proceedings of the 1967 International Symposium, California Institute of Technology), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969, pp. 109122.Google Scholar
[3]Geiser, J. R., Nonstandard analysis, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 16 (1970), pp. 297320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar