2
$\begingroup$

Any two complete ordered fields are isomorphic (as proved, e.g., in Spivak's Calculus; see also this question).

While I understand this proof, I cannot yet appreciate why it is necessary. Given any set of axioms for some algebraic structure, is it not always the case that any two constructions satisfying those axioms are isomorphic? If not, can someone supply a counterexample?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Eh, vector spaces of dimension 43 and 87 are not isomorphic as vector spaces. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 25, 2014 at 13:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Is there only one kind of group? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 25, 2014 at 14:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @JpMcCarthy Yes, this answers the question. But add the restriction that they have the same dimension and your example fails. I think this is where the OP is getting at. I know you know this, I'm just putting it out there. $\endgroup$
    – Git Gud
    Commented Mar 25, 2014 at 14:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Any isomorphism is a bijection, so as more general example you just need to take algebraic structures with different cardinalities. $\endgroup$
    – Git Gud
    Commented Mar 25, 2014 at 14:17

4 Answers 4

5
$\begingroup$

Usually we can't assume that a set of axioms only has one model up to isomorphism. In fact, if a set of first-order axioms has just one infinite model, then it is a consequence of the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem that it has models of all infinite cardinalities. Since all isomorphisms are bijections, it follows that there must be two non-isomorphic models. The reason why this doesn't break down for complete ordered fields is that completeness is a second-order axiom: it quantifies over infinite sets of variables ('any bounded increasing sequence has a least upper bound').

However, there are sets of axioms whose models of a given size are all isomorphic. This phenomenon is known as categoricity. An example of this is unbounded dense linear orders, whose theory is countably categorical (i.e. all its countably infinite models are isomorphic). In other words, if $M$ is a countable set endowed with a dense linear order $<_M$, such that $M$ has no $<_M$-least or $<_M$-greatest element, then $(M,<_M) \cong (\mathbb{Q}, <)$.

Categoricity is a special property held by certain sets of axioms, but certainly not all sets of axioms. Most of the time, you cannot expect categoricity. (E.g. two given groups of a given cardinality, especially when infinite, are typically non-isomorphic.)

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Consider, for example, the group axioms. It is not the case that any two structures that satisfy the axioms are isomorphic -- in other words, not all groups are isomorphic.

It is a quite unusual property of the axioms for complete ordered fields that they allow exactly one realization up to isomorphism.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

The complete ordered field example "cheats", because it implicitly invokes set theory in addition to ordered field theory.

You may find the theory of real closed fields to be interesting: it is the theory of complete ordered fields without "cheating", and there are many non-isomorphic examples. The smallest example is the field of all numbers that are both real and algebraic.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Nope.

Suppose your only axiom for an algebraic structure with a binary operation * is

  1. $\forall$x $\forall$y (x*y)=(y*x).

Two constructions (if I've understood your term correctly) which satisfy this axiom are:

1  a  b
a  a  b
b  b  a

and

2  a  b
a  b  b
b  b  a

But clearly these structures are not isomorphic.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .