遗留之物
发表于 2025-3-25 03:46:49
http://reply.papertrans.cn/15/1410/140930/140930_21.png
油膏
发表于 2025-3-25 07:33:46
The Syntax and Semantics of ,CRL,m is very simple to state: for, it says that a theory . categorical in some uncountable power is, consequently, categorical in every uncountable power. This is noteworthy, but perhaps not so dramatic and relevant. However the germs of Morley’s ideas went much further, and their richness permeated th
Intersect
发表于 2025-3-25 13:25:53
Algebra of Communicating Processesountable language ., and ωdenotes a big saturated model of .. In the last chapter we defined Morley rank and Morley degree as a complexity measure for definable sets. In particular we studied the simplest infinite definable sets with respect to this measure, i. e. the strongly minimal sets, those ha
Gourmet
发表于 2025-3-25 18:33:09
http://reply.papertrans.cn/15/1410/140930/140930_24.png
主讲人
发表于 2025-3-25 20:46:35
Individuals, Reflexion, and Interactionr orderings such that the subsets of . definable in . are as trivial as possible, and restrict to the finite unions of singletons and open intervals, possibly with infinite endpoints ±∞ (equivalently to the finite unions of open, closed, ... intervals in the broad sense including half-lines and the
故意
发表于 2025-3-26 01:59:53
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0812-9algebra; algebraic geometry; algebraic group; compactness theorem; logic; manifold; model theory; proof
暖昧关系
发表于 2025-3-26 05:34:21
978-1-4020-1331-7Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003
ANTH
发表于 2025-3-26 12:25:33
http://reply.papertrans.cn/15/1410/140930/140930_28.png
Fantasy
发表于 2025-3-26 13:48:21
Cesare Parenti,Alberto Parmeggiani:.≥0 (being nonnegative) is the same thing as ϕ′(.):∃.(.=.) (being a square). Similarly, in the ordered domain of integers, ϕ(.):.≥0 (being positive) has the same interpretation as ϕ′(.):∃.∃.∃.∃.(.=∑.) (being the sum of four squares): this is a celebrated theorem of Lagrange, already mentioned in the last chapter.
声音刺耳
发表于 2025-3-26 17:39:01
Cesare Parenti,Alberto Parmeggianie interpretations of symbols of . in . are definable in . As in the case of sets, we can introduce also the concept of . for .⊆.. In the quoted example, we observed that (N, +, ·) is a structure definable in (Z, +, ·). Here we provide some further examples.