Why constant symbols in a language? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Why does $phi,(phiRightarrowpsi)$ not semantically entail $psi$ if $phi$ has a free variable and $psi$ doesn't?satisfiability in a structure implies satisfiability in a substructure?Eventually constant variable assignmentsTerm models in group theoryLanguage structure of $mathbbR$ and $L_mathbbR$Structure/Model for first order languageExtending a language by adding a constant symbolDo we really need constant symbols in first-order theories?Logic: one vs many structures for a given languageIntuition behind a structure of a language in mathematical logic [long read but simple]

Is it true that "carbohydrates are of no use for the basal metabolic need"?

When -s is used with third person singular. What's its use in this context?

How to find all the available tools in macOS terminal?

Can Pao de Queijo, and similar foods, be kosher for Passover?

How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?

When to stop saving and start investing?

Antler Helmet: Can it work?

Is the Standard Deduction better than Itemized when both are the same amount?

Gastric acid as a weapon

Do I really need recursive chmod to restrict access to a folder?

Is a manifold-with-boundary with given interior and non-empty boundary essentially unique?

What causes the vertical darker bands in my photo?

How do I keep my slimes from escaping their pens?

What is the longest distance a 13th-level monk can jump while attacking on the same turn?

Right-skewed distribution with mean equals to mode?

Why constant symbols in a language?

If 'B is more likely given A', then 'A is more likely given B'

Disable hyphenation for an entire paragraph

Java 8 stream max() function argument type Comparator vs Comparable

Using et al. for a last / senior author rather than for a first author

Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?

Is there a documented rationale why the House Ways and Means chairman can demand tax info?

What LEGO pieces have "real-world" functionality?

How discoverable are IPv6 addresses and AAAA names by potential attackers?



Why constant symbols in a language?



Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Why does $phi,(phiRightarrowpsi)$ not semantically entail $psi$ if $phi$ has a free variable and $psi$ doesn't?satisfiability in a structure implies satisfiability in a substructure?Eventually constant variable assignmentsTerm models in group theoryLanguage structure of $mathbbR$ and $L_mathbbR$Structure/Model for first order languageExtending a language by adding a constant symbolDo we really need constant symbols in first-order theories?Logic: one vs many structures for a given languageIntuition behind a structure of a language in mathematical logic [long read but simple]










1












$begingroup$


What is the point of constant symbols in a language?



For example we take the language of rings $(0,1,+,-,cdot)$.
What is so special about $0,1$ now? What is the difference between 0 and 1 besides some other element of the ring?



I am aware, that you want to have some elements, that you call 0 and 1 which have the desired properties, like $x+0=0+x=x$ or $1cdot x = xcdot 1=x$.



Is there something else, which makes constants 'special'?



Other example: Suppose we have the language $L=c$ where $c$ is a constant symbol.
Now we observe the L-structure $mathfrakS_n$ over the set $mathbbZ$, where $c$ gets interpreted by $n$.



Is there any difference, between $c$ and $n$?
Or are they just the same and you can view it as some sort of substitution?



For $mathfrakS_0$ we would understand $c$ as $0$.
Since there are no relation- or functionsymbols, we just have the set $mathbbZ$ and could note them as



$dotso, -1, c, 1, dotso$



If we take the usual function $+$ and add it $L=c,+$ now $mathfrakS_0$ has the property, that $c+c=c$ for example.



I hope you understand what I am asking for.



I think it boils down to:




Is there a difference between the structure $mathfrakS_n$ as L-structure and $mathfrakS_n$ as $L_emptyset$-structure, where $L_emptyset=emptyset$ (so does not contain a constant symbol).




But I want to get as much insight here as possible. So if you do not understand what I am asking for, it might be best, if you just take a guess. :)



Thanks in advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
    $endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    4 hours ago















1












$begingroup$


What is the point of constant symbols in a language?



For example we take the language of rings $(0,1,+,-,cdot)$.
What is so special about $0,1$ now? What is the difference between 0 and 1 besides some other element of the ring?



I am aware, that you want to have some elements, that you call 0 and 1 which have the desired properties, like $x+0=0+x=x$ or $1cdot x = xcdot 1=x$.



Is there something else, which makes constants 'special'?



Other example: Suppose we have the language $L=c$ where $c$ is a constant symbol.
Now we observe the L-structure $mathfrakS_n$ over the set $mathbbZ$, where $c$ gets interpreted by $n$.



Is there any difference, between $c$ and $n$?
Or are they just the same and you can view it as some sort of substitution?



For $mathfrakS_0$ we would understand $c$ as $0$.
Since there are no relation- or functionsymbols, we just have the set $mathbbZ$ and could note them as



$dotso, -1, c, 1, dotso$



If we take the usual function $+$ and add it $L=c,+$ now $mathfrakS_0$ has the property, that $c+c=c$ for example.



I hope you understand what I am asking for.



I think it boils down to:




Is there a difference between the structure $mathfrakS_n$ as L-structure and $mathfrakS_n$ as $L_emptyset$-structure, where $L_emptyset=emptyset$ (so does not contain a constant symbol).




But I want to get as much insight here as possible. So if you do not understand what I am asking for, it might be best, if you just take a guess. :)



Thanks in advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
    $endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    4 hours ago













1












1








1





$begingroup$


What is the point of constant symbols in a language?



For example we take the language of rings $(0,1,+,-,cdot)$.
What is so special about $0,1$ now? What is the difference between 0 and 1 besides some other element of the ring?



I am aware, that you want to have some elements, that you call 0 and 1 which have the desired properties, like $x+0=0+x=x$ or $1cdot x = xcdot 1=x$.



Is there something else, which makes constants 'special'?



Other example: Suppose we have the language $L=c$ where $c$ is a constant symbol.
Now we observe the L-structure $mathfrakS_n$ over the set $mathbbZ$, where $c$ gets interpreted by $n$.



Is there any difference, between $c$ and $n$?
Or are they just the same and you can view it as some sort of substitution?



For $mathfrakS_0$ we would understand $c$ as $0$.
Since there are no relation- or functionsymbols, we just have the set $mathbbZ$ and could note them as



$dotso, -1, c, 1, dotso$



If we take the usual function $+$ and add it $L=c,+$ now $mathfrakS_0$ has the property, that $c+c=c$ for example.



I hope you understand what I am asking for.



I think it boils down to:




Is there a difference between the structure $mathfrakS_n$ as L-structure and $mathfrakS_n$ as $L_emptyset$-structure, where $L_emptyset=emptyset$ (so does not contain a constant symbol).




But I want to get as much insight here as possible. So if you do not understand what I am asking for, it might be best, if you just take a guess. :)



Thanks in advance.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




What is the point of constant symbols in a language?



For example we take the language of rings $(0,1,+,-,cdot)$.
What is so special about $0,1$ now? What is the difference between 0 and 1 besides some other element of the ring?



I am aware, that you want to have some elements, that you call 0 and 1 which have the desired properties, like $x+0=0+x=x$ or $1cdot x = xcdot 1=x$.



Is there something else, which makes constants 'special'?



Other example: Suppose we have the language $L=c$ where $c$ is a constant symbol.
Now we observe the L-structure $mathfrakS_n$ over the set $mathbbZ$, where $c$ gets interpreted by $n$.



Is there any difference, between $c$ and $n$?
Or are they just the same and you can view it as some sort of substitution?



For $mathfrakS_0$ we would understand $c$ as $0$.
Since there are no relation- or functionsymbols, we just have the set $mathbbZ$ and could note them as



$dotso, -1, c, 1, dotso$



If we take the usual function $+$ and add it $L=c,+$ now $mathfrakS_0$ has the property, that $c+c=c$ for example.



I hope you understand what I am asking for.



I think it boils down to:




Is there a difference between the structure $mathfrakS_n$ as L-structure and $mathfrakS_n$ as $L_emptyset$-structure, where $L_emptyset=emptyset$ (so does not contain a constant symbol).




But I want to get as much insight here as possible. So if you do not understand what I am asking for, it might be best, if you just take a guess. :)



Thanks in advance.







logic first-order-logic






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









CornmanCornman

3,74821233




3,74821233











  • $begingroup$
    In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
    $endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    4 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
    $endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    4 hours ago















$begingroup$
In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
In the empty language, given any structure with more than one element, then there are no definable members in your structure. But once you add a constant, you add a definable element.
$endgroup$
– Asaf Karagila
4 hours ago










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

An $L$-structure is not just a set, it is a set together with interpretations of the constant symbols, function symbols and relation symbols in $L$. You need to keep track of the interpretations as additional data so that you can do things like define homomorphisms of $L$-structures: namely, they're those functions that respect the interpretations of the symbols.



For example, "$mathbbZ$ as a group" and "$mathbbZ$ as a set" have the same underlying set, but the former additionally has (at least) a binary operation $+ : mathbbZ times mathbbZ to mathbbZ$, which must be preserved by group homomorphisms.



In your example, a homomorphism of $L$-structures $f : mathfrakS_n to mathfrakS_m$ would be required to satisfy $f(n) = m$, since $n$ and $m$ are the respective interpretations of the constant $c$, but a homomorphism of $L_varnothing$-structures would not.



So while "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" and "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" have the same underlying set, they are not the same object.



Fun fact: the assignment from "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" to "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" is an example of a forgetful functor.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
    $endgroup$
    – Cornman
    4 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
    $endgroup$
    – Clive Newstead
    3 hours ago



















1












$begingroup$

Clive's answer is already a good one, I just wanted to add another important point about constants. They give us the power to say infinitely many things about one element.



For example, if we consider Peano Arithmetic then obviously $mathbb N$ is a model. Now, add a constant $c$ to our language and add sentences $c > bar n$ for all $n in mathbb N$ (where $bar n$ stands for 1 added $n$ times: $1 + 1 + ldots + 1$). This new theory is consistent by compactness, so it has a model $M$. In $M$ we have an interpretation for $c$, which is bigger than all natural numbers. So we obtain a nonstandard model of arithmetic. Something similar can be done to create a model that looks like the reals, but has infinitesimals.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3189303%2fwhy-constant-symbols-in-a-language%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4












    $begingroup$

    An $L$-structure is not just a set, it is a set together with interpretations of the constant symbols, function symbols and relation symbols in $L$. You need to keep track of the interpretations as additional data so that you can do things like define homomorphisms of $L$-structures: namely, they're those functions that respect the interpretations of the symbols.



    For example, "$mathbbZ$ as a group" and "$mathbbZ$ as a set" have the same underlying set, but the former additionally has (at least) a binary operation $+ : mathbbZ times mathbbZ to mathbbZ$, which must be preserved by group homomorphisms.



    In your example, a homomorphism of $L$-structures $f : mathfrakS_n to mathfrakS_m$ would be required to satisfy $f(n) = m$, since $n$ and $m$ are the respective interpretations of the constant $c$, but a homomorphism of $L_varnothing$-structures would not.



    So while "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" and "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" have the same underlying set, they are not the same object.



    Fun fact: the assignment from "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" to "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" is an example of a forgetful functor.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
      $endgroup$
      – Cornman
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
      $endgroup$
      – Clive Newstead
      3 hours ago
















    4












    $begingroup$

    An $L$-structure is not just a set, it is a set together with interpretations of the constant symbols, function symbols and relation symbols in $L$. You need to keep track of the interpretations as additional data so that you can do things like define homomorphisms of $L$-structures: namely, they're those functions that respect the interpretations of the symbols.



    For example, "$mathbbZ$ as a group" and "$mathbbZ$ as a set" have the same underlying set, but the former additionally has (at least) a binary operation $+ : mathbbZ times mathbbZ to mathbbZ$, which must be preserved by group homomorphisms.



    In your example, a homomorphism of $L$-structures $f : mathfrakS_n to mathfrakS_m$ would be required to satisfy $f(n) = m$, since $n$ and $m$ are the respective interpretations of the constant $c$, but a homomorphism of $L_varnothing$-structures would not.



    So while "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" and "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" have the same underlying set, they are not the same object.



    Fun fact: the assignment from "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" to "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" is an example of a forgetful functor.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
      $endgroup$
      – Cornman
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
      $endgroup$
      – Clive Newstead
      3 hours ago














    4












    4








    4





    $begingroup$

    An $L$-structure is not just a set, it is a set together with interpretations of the constant symbols, function symbols and relation symbols in $L$. You need to keep track of the interpretations as additional data so that you can do things like define homomorphisms of $L$-structures: namely, they're those functions that respect the interpretations of the symbols.



    For example, "$mathbbZ$ as a group" and "$mathbbZ$ as a set" have the same underlying set, but the former additionally has (at least) a binary operation $+ : mathbbZ times mathbbZ to mathbbZ$, which must be preserved by group homomorphisms.



    In your example, a homomorphism of $L$-structures $f : mathfrakS_n to mathfrakS_m$ would be required to satisfy $f(n) = m$, since $n$ and $m$ are the respective interpretations of the constant $c$, but a homomorphism of $L_varnothing$-structures would not.



    So while "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" and "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" have the same underlying set, they are not the same object.



    Fun fact: the assignment from "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" to "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" is an example of a forgetful functor.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    An $L$-structure is not just a set, it is a set together with interpretations of the constant symbols, function symbols and relation symbols in $L$. You need to keep track of the interpretations as additional data so that you can do things like define homomorphisms of $L$-structures: namely, they're those functions that respect the interpretations of the symbols.



    For example, "$mathbbZ$ as a group" and "$mathbbZ$ as a set" have the same underlying set, but the former additionally has (at least) a binary operation $+ : mathbbZ times mathbbZ to mathbbZ$, which must be preserved by group homomorphisms.



    In your example, a homomorphism of $L$-structures $f : mathfrakS_n to mathfrakS_m$ would be required to satisfy $f(n) = m$, since $n$ and $m$ are the respective interpretations of the constant $c$, but a homomorphism of $L_varnothing$-structures would not.



    So while "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" and "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" have the same underlying set, they are not the same object.



    Fun fact: the assignment from "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L$-structure" to "$mathfrakS_n$ as an $L_varnothing$-structure" is an example of a forgetful functor.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 4 hours ago









    Clive NewsteadClive Newstead

    52.2k474137




    52.2k474137











    • $begingroup$
      Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
      $endgroup$
      – Cornman
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
      $endgroup$
      – Clive Newstead
      3 hours ago

















    • $begingroup$
      Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
      $endgroup$
      – Cornman
      4 hours ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
      $endgroup$
      – Clive Newstead
      3 hours ago
















    $begingroup$
    Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
    $endgroup$
    – Cornman
    4 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Now I wonder, if structures $mathfrakS_n, mathfrakS_m$ can be isomorphic (for $nneq m$) when you take $L=c,<$. Then it has to be $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$. But such an isomorphism must preserve the constant symbols. So $f(n)=m$ and $f(m)=n$ and for every other $zneq m,n$ it is $f(z)=z$. But then you get $n<mLeftrightarrow f(n)<f(m)$ so $n<mLeftrightarrow m<n$?
    $endgroup$
    – Cornman
    4 hours ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
    $endgroup$
    – Clive Newstead
    3 hours ago





    $begingroup$
    @Cornman: Right, so what that tells you is that if $m ne n$ then there is no isomorphism of $ c, < $-structures between $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$ (assuming that $<$ is interpreted as the usual order relation on $mathbbZ$ in both $mathfrakS_n$ and $mathfrakS_m$).
    $endgroup$
    – Clive Newstead
    3 hours ago












    1












    $begingroup$

    Clive's answer is already a good one, I just wanted to add another important point about constants. They give us the power to say infinitely many things about one element.



    For example, if we consider Peano Arithmetic then obviously $mathbb N$ is a model. Now, add a constant $c$ to our language and add sentences $c > bar n$ for all $n in mathbb N$ (where $bar n$ stands for 1 added $n$ times: $1 + 1 + ldots + 1$). This new theory is consistent by compactness, so it has a model $M$. In $M$ we have an interpretation for $c$, which is bigger than all natural numbers. So we obtain a nonstandard model of arithmetic. Something similar can be done to create a model that looks like the reals, but has infinitesimals.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      1












      $begingroup$

      Clive's answer is already a good one, I just wanted to add another important point about constants. They give us the power to say infinitely many things about one element.



      For example, if we consider Peano Arithmetic then obviously $mathbb N$ is a model. Now, add a constant $c$ to our language and add sentences $c > bar n$ for all $n in mathbb N$ (where $bar n$ stands for 1 added $n$ times: $1 + 1 + ldots + 1$). This new theory is consistent by compactness, so it has a model $M$. In $M$ we have an interpretation for $c$, which is bigger than all natural numbers. So we obtain a nonstandard model of arithmetic. Something similar can be done to create a model that looks like the reals, but has infinitesimals.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Clive's answer is already a good one, I just wanted to add another important point about constants. They give us the power to say infinitely many things about one element.



        For example, if we consider Peano Arithmetic then obviously $mathbb N$ is a model. Now, add a constant $c$ to our language and add sentences $c > bar n$ for all $n in mathbb N$ (where $bar n$ stands for 1 added $n$ times: $1 + 1 + ldots + 1$). This new theory is consistent by compactness, so it has a model $M$. In $M$ we have an interpretation for $c$, which is bigger than all natural numbers. So we obtain a nonstandard model of arithmetic. Something similar can be done to create a model that looks like the reals, but has infinitesimals.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Clive's answer is already a good one, I just wanted to add another important point about constants. They give us the power to say infinitely many things about one element.



        For example, if we consider Peano Arithmetic then obviously $mathbb N$ is a model. Now, add a constant $c$ to our language and add sentences $c > bar n$ for all $n in mathbb N$ (where $bar n$ stands for 1 added $n$ times: $1 + 1 + ldots + 1$). This new theory is consistent by compactness, so it has a model $M$. In $M$ we have an interpretation for $c$, which is bigger than all natural numbers. So we obtain a nonstandard model of arithmetic. Something similar can be done to create a model that looks like the reals, but has infinitesimals.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 4 hours ago









        Mark KamsmaMark Kamsma

        3818




        3818



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3189303%2fwhy-constant-symbols-in-a-language%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її