##
**Ehrenfeucht’s lemma in set theory.**
*(English)*
Zbl 1455.03065

Summary: Ehrenfeucht’s lemma asserts that whenever one element of a model of Peano arithmetic is definable from another, they satisfy different types. We consider here the analogue of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma for models of set theory. The original argument applies directly to the ordinal-definable elements of any model of set theory, and, in particular, Ehrenfeucht’s lemma holds fully for models of set theory satisfying \(V=\mathsf{HOD}\). We show that the lemma fails in the forcing extension of the universe by adding a Cohen real. We go on to formulate a scheme of natural parametric generalizations of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma, namely, the principles of the form \(\mathsf{EL}(A,P,Q)\), which asserts that \(P\)-definability from \(A\) implies \(Q\)-discernibility. We also consider various analogues of Ehrenfeucht’s lemma obtained by using algebraicity in place of definability, where a set \(b\) is algebraic in \(a\) if it is a member of a finite set definable from \(a\). Ehrenfeucht’s lemma holds for the ordinal-algebraic sets, we prove, if and only if the ordinal-algebraic and ordinal-definable sets coincide. Using a similar analysis, we answer two open questions posed earlier by the third author and C. Leahy, showing that (i) algebraicity and definability need not coincide in models of set theory and (ii) the internal and external notions of being ordinal algebraic need not coincide.

### MSC:

03E45 | Inner models, including constructibility, ordinal definability, and core models |

03E47 | Other notions of set-theoretic definability |

03C55 | Set-theoretic model theory |

03C62 | Models of arithmetic and set theory |

### Software:

MathOverflow### References:

[1] | Easton, W., “Powers of regular cardinals,” Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, Princeton, 1964. · Zbl 0209.30601 · doi:10.1016/0003-4843(70)90012-4 |

[2] | Ehrenfeucht, A., “Discernible elements in models for Peano arithmetic,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 38 (1973), pp. 291–2. · Zbl 0279.02036 · doi:10.2307/2272063 |

[3] | Enayat, A., “Leibnizian models of set theory,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 69 (2004), pp. 775–89. · Zbl 1070.03023 · doi:10.2178/jsl/1096901766 |

[4] | Enayat, A., “On the Leibniz-Mycielski axiom in set theory,” Fundamenta Mathematicae, vol. 181 (2004), pp. 215–31. · Zbl 1051.03041 · doi:10.4064/fm181-3-2 |

[5] | Felgner, U., “Choice functions on sets and classes,” Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 84 (1976), pp. 217–55. · Zbl 0341.02054 |

[6] | Gaifman, H., “Models and types of Peano’s arithmetic,” Annals of Mathematical Logic, vol. 9 (1976), pp. 223–306. · Zbl 0332.02058 · doi:10.1016/0003-4843(76)90002-4 |

[7] | Groszek, M., and R. Laver, “Finite groups of OD-conjugates,” Periodica Mathematica Hungarica, vol. 18 (1987), pp. 87–97. · Zbl 0637.03050 · doi:10.1007/BF01896284 |

[8] | Hamkins, J. D., “Does ZFC prove the universe is linearly orderable?” MathOverflow answer, 2012, http://mathoverflow.net/q/110823 (version 2012-11-03). |

[9] | Hamkins, J. D., and C. Leahy, “Algebraicity and implicit definability in set theory,” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 57 (2016), pp. 431–39. · Zbl 1436.03264 |

[10] | Hamkins, J. D., D. Linetsky, and J. Reitz, “Pointwise definable models of set theory,” Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 78 (2013), pp. 139–56. · Zbl 1270.03101 · doi:10.2178/jsl.7801090 |

[11] | Paris, J., “Minimal models of ZF,” in Proceedings of the Bertrand Russell Memorial Conference (Uldum, 1971), Bertrand Russell Memorial Conference, Leeds, 1973, pp. 327–31. · Zbl 1416.03017 |

This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.