Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

PHIL 350: Problem Set 1

Spring 2023
Due April 27, 11:59pm.

1. Please submit corrections for Problem Set 0. Each correction should explain why the answer
you gave was deficient. You can recover points up to the grade of 90% on the original PS0
assignment.

2. Definitions: For models A = (A, cA , RA , f A), B = (B, cB , RB , f B) of a common language L,

we have the following definitions for functions h : A → B.

• h is a homomorphism if it commutes with the interpretation of the non-logical vocab-

ulary:
(a) h(cA ) = cB .
(b) for any a1 , . . . , an ∈ A: if A |= R[a1 , . . . , an ] then B |= R[h(a1 ), . . . , h(an )].
(c) for any a1 , . . . , an ∈ A: h(f A (a1 , . . . , an )) = f B (h(a1 ), . . . , h(an )).
• h is an embedding if it is an injective homomorphism, and satisfies the further property:
(d) for any a1 , . . . , an ∈ A: A |= R[a1 , . . . , an ] if and only if B |= R[h(a1 ), . . . , h(an )].
• h is an isomorphism if it is a surjective embedding.
• If h : A → A is an embedding, we call it an endomorphism.
• If h : A → A is an isomorphism, we call it an automorphism.
• If A ⊆ B and the map h : A → B defined by h(a) = a is an embedding, then we say
that A is a submodel of B; or conversely, that B is an extension of A.
• An embedding e is an elementary embedding just if it preserves all first-order formulas:
A |= ϕ[a1 , . . . , an ] if and only if B |= ϕ[e(a1 ), . . . , e(an )].
• We say that A is an elementary submodel of B, written A ⪯ B, just if h(a) = a is an
elementary embedding.
• We say that A and B are elementarily equivalent, written A ≡ B, just if for any (first-
order) sentence ϕ, we have A |= ϕ if and only if B |= ϕ.

1
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Problem 1

(25 points)
Prove the Tarski-Vaught test for elementary submodels: If L is a first-order language, A is a
submodel of B, then TFAE:

(a) A ⪯ B

(b) For every formula ϕ(⃗x, y) and all ⃗a ∈ A: B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, y) then B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, d) for some d ∈ A.

Here, ⃗a and ⃗x are just abbreviations for a1 , . . . , aB and x1 , . . . , xB , respectively. So, what’s hap-
pening in condition (b) could be described this way: if B thinks something is ϕ, then B thinks
something from A.

Solution. Proof
Let A be an elementary submodel of B denoted A ⪯ B. Let ϕ(⃗x, y) be a formula and ⃗a ∈ A.
Suppose B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, y). Then A |= ∃dϕ(⃗a, d) for some d ∈ A. Therefore B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, d) for some
d ∈ A.
Now, suppose for every formula ϕ(⃗x, y) and all ⃗a ∈ A: B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, y) then B |= ∃yϕ(⃗a, d) for some
d ∈ A. Consider h : A → B such that h(a) = a for a ∈ A and h(d) = y for d ∈ A. Then for all
first order formulas: A |= ∃dϕ(⃗a, d) implies B |= ∃yϕ(h(⃗a), y), and if B |= ∃h(d)ϕ(h(⃗a), h(d) then
A |= ∃dϕ(⃗a, d). Thus h is an elementary embedding, and therefore A is a submodel of B, denoted
A ⪯ B.

2
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Problem 2

Remember that we can deal with models even if we don’t think of them as satisfying theories. For
example, we can take the structure

Z = (Z, 0, 1, +, ×)

which is the integers Z = ..., −2, −1, 0, 1, 2, ... with the usual operations.
Now consider the function f (x) = −x. Answer the following questions, giving a proof if affirming,
and a counterexample if negating.

(a) (10 points) Is f injective?

Proof. Let a, b ∈ Z such that f (a) = f (b). Then

− a = −b
⇒ − 1 ∗ −a = −1 ∗ −b
⇒a = b

(b) (10 points) Is f surjective?

Proof. Let y ∈ Z be arbitrary. We will show ∃x ∈ Z such that f (x) = y. Consider x = f (y).
Note that x ∈ Z. Then f (x) = y. Thus ∀y ∈ Z, ∃x ∈ Z such that f (x) = y.

(c) (10 points) Is f bijective?

Proof. This follows from the previous two proofs.

(d) (20 points) Is f automorphic?

Counter Example. Let a, b, c ∈ Z such that a ∗ b = c. Then f (a ∗ b) = f (c) = −c, but

f (a) ∗ f (b) = −a ∗ −b = c. Since c ̸= −c, f (a ∗ b) ̸= f (a) ∗ f (b). Therefore f is not an
automorphism.

3
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Problem 3

Let N be the standard model of the natural numbers. Show that there is a sequence of models Mi
for i = 1, 2, 3, . . . such that:

• Mi |= P A1 for every i.

• Mi ∼
= Mj for i ̸= j.

• Mi ̸⪯ Mj for i ̸= j.

• Mi ⊆ Mj if j ≤ i.

• The intersection of all the Mi is empty, where Mi is the domain of Mi .

Hint: Push-through h(x) = 2x + 2.

You should use the following results, mentioned in class, which appear in the book: Corollary 2.5
and The Push Through Construction on pages 35-36.
For the subset one, you should first try proving this induction: If x ∈ Mi , then 2x + 2 ∈ Mi .

Solution. Proof
We start with the standard model of Peano Arithmetic, so M1 = P A1 . Next, define h(x) = 2x + 2.
Now, using push through construction, for each i > 1, let Mi be the push-through of Mi−1 under
h. That is, Mi is a model with domain h[Mi−1 ] that satisfies the same first-order sentences as
Mi−1 , with the interpretation of each symbol in Mi being the same as its interpretation in Mi−1 ,
except for h(x), which is interpreted as 2x + 2 in Mi .
Then since M1 = P A1 which obviously means M1 |= P A1 , and because push-through construction
preserves the first-order theory of the original structure, we know that Mi |= P A1 for every i.
Since h is a bijection between Mi−1 and h[Mi−1 ], the models M1 , M2 , M3 , . . . are all isomorphic.
Since h[Mi−1 ] is a proper subset of Mi , we have Mi ⊂ Mi+1 forTall i. Because there exists x such
that x ∈ Mi but x ∈ ̸ Mi+1 for every i, this further implies that ∞
i=1 Mi = ∅.

4
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Problem 4

Modify the previous problem so that the intersection of all the Mi is infinite.
HINT: Split N into two disjoint, infinite subsets; define h so that it moves everything in one of
those subsets, but leaves the other subset fixed. You don’t need to go through all the arguments
of the previous problem.

Solution. Proof
Keep everything the same from the previous problem except now define
(
x x is odd
h(x) =
2x + 2 x is even

T∞
Now i=1 Mi is the odd numbers and is infinite.

5
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Problem 5

Recall that given a deduction system, we can define the relation ⊢ so that Γ ⊢ ϕ holds just when
there is a deduction whose premises are in Γ that ends with ϕ, then if Γ ⊢ ϕ, then ϕ ∈ Γ.
We say that the set of sentences Γ is consistent just if Γ ̸⊢ ϕ ∧ ¬ϕ for any ϕ.
Say that Γ is consistent* just if there is a ϕ such that Γ ̸⊢ ϕ.
A good deduction system has all the obvious rules for reasoning. Following are some facts about
any good deduction system. When I write Γ; ϕ, that means the set of premises including all of Γ
plus ϕ. Likewise Γ; δ means the set of premises includes everything in Γ and everything in δ.

• Γ ⊢ A ∧ B iff Γ ⊢ A and Γ ⊢ B.

• If Γ ⊢ A then Γ ⊢ A ∨ B, for any B.

• If Γ ⊢ A ∨ B and Γ ⊢ ¬A, then Γ ⊢ B.

Prove that in any good deduction system, Γ is consistent iff it is consistent*.

Solution. Proof
For the forward direction, suppose Γ is consistent and let ψ such that Γ ⊢ ψ. Let ϕ = ¬ψ. Then
Γ ̸⊢ ϕ. Thus there exists ϕ such that Γ ̸⊢ ϕ and therefore Γ is consistent*.
For the backward direction, suppose Γ is consistent*. If Γ ̸⊢ ψ ∧ ¬ψ for any ψ then we are done, so
assume for contradiction there exists a ψ such that Γ ⊢ ψ ∧ ¬ψ. Let ϕ be arbitrary. Since Γ ⊢ ψ,
Γ ⊢ ψ ∨ ϕ. But also Γ ⊢ ¬ψ. Therefore Γ ⊢ ϕ. Thus it is not the case that there is a ϕ such that
Γ ̸⊢ ϕ. But this is a contradiction. Therefore, if Γ is consistent*, then Γ is consistent.

6
Philosophy 350: Logic Homework 1 Ian Cramer

Collaborators

I worked with the following other students on my homework:

1. Maddy Roffey