Wednesday, 7 March 2012

ct.category theory - Can infinite first-order categories be specified other than as categories of models?

I am glad to see that a general question like Is there a relationship between model theory and category theory? receives quite a lot attention and no down-votes for being too general and unspecific. So I feel encouraged to pose some follow-up questions (firstly restricted to first-order model theory).



Preliminaries



I hope the following statements are sufficiently sensible, precise and correct.



  • Each first-order theory $T$ with signature $sigma$ unambigously defines a class of (ZF-)models.


  • This class of models of $T$ together with the $sigma$-homomorphisms form a category (the category of models of $T$).


  • Two first-order theories with two arbitrary signatures may define equivalent categories of models.



Definition: A first-order theory $T$
provides a model of a category $C$ if the
category of models of $T$ is
equivalent to $C$.




  • Each category $C$ defines a (possibly empty) set of first-order theories: the set of all $T$ which provide a model of $C$.

Questions



[Remark: I had to work this question over, since it seemed to be ill-posed.]



Old version:
Can infinite concrete categories be specified
other than as categories of (ZF-)models of some (possibly higher-order) theory? Examples?



New version (explicitly restricted to first-order theories):




Given an infinite category of models
of a first-order theory $T$. Can this
category - or one equivalent to it - be
specified/represented/given
independently of any first-order
theory $T$ and its (ZF-)models?




Remark: $T$ of course can be specified/represented/given independently of its models: as a set of formulas.





Why is the notion of models of a (concrete)
category
so uncommon? (Maybe because the
answer to the first question is "No"?)






Is there a genuine model-theoretic notion of two
equivalent theories if these have
two arbitrary signatures?





No comments:

Post a Comment