Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T19:23:35.236Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Isomorphism of structures in S-toposes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

J. L. Bell*
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, England

Extract

It is a well-known fact that two structures are ∞ω-equivalent if and only if they are isomorphic in some Boolean extension of the universe of sets (cf. [4]; an early allusion to this result appears in [8]). My principal object here is to show that arbitrary toposes defined over the category of sets may be used instead. Thus ∞ω-equivalence means isomorphism in the extremely general context of some universe of "variable" sets in which not only is much of the usual set-theoretic machinery unavailable but the underlying logic is not even classical. This provides further support for the view that ∞ω-equivalence is a relation between structures of fundamental importance.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1981

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]Bell, J.L., Boolean-valued models and independence proofs in set theory, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977.Google Scholar
[2]Brockway, M., Soft objects of a topos and sheaves over the global truth values, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
[3]Dickmann, M., Large infinitary languages, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975.Google Scholar
[4]Ellentuck, E., Categoricity regained, this Journal, vol. 41 (1976), pp. 639643.Google Scholar
[5]Higgs, D., A category approach to Boolean-valued set theory, unpublished typescript, University of Waterloo, 1973.Google Scholar
[6]Johstone, P.T., Topos theory, Academic Press, London 1977.Google Scholar
[7]Maclane, S., Categories for the working mathematician, Springer, New York, 1971.Google Scholar
[8]Nadel, M., An application of model theory to set theory, Israel Journal of Mathematics, vol. 11 (1972), pp. 386393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar