Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-09
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

A countable nonstandard model has an element above all numerals

Statement

In ZF there is an at most countable nonempty model M of Th(N) in the fixed language (0,S,<) and an element bM such that Mn<b for every standard n<ω. The reduct M is not isomorphic to the standard structure N=(ω,0,S,<).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The standard natural-number structure and its externally defined sentence theory.

[F1]

The language, complete semantic theory and numerals 0=0, n+1=S(n) are those of Nonstandard models of the complete natural-number theory.

[F2]

A finitely satisfiable explicitly countable theory has an at most countable model. (Compactness for explicitly countable languages)

Proof

1.1

Add one fresh constant c and put T=Th(N){n<c:n<ω}. For a finite subset, let m be the largest index in its inequalities if any occur, and interpret c by m+1 in N. Then each required inequality is n<m+1, true since nm; every included sentence of the complete theory is true by definition. If no inequality occurs, interpret c by 0. Thus every finite subset has a model in the countable expanded signature.

F1
2.1

F2 gives an at most countable NT. Let M be its original-language reduct and b=cN. Reducts keep all interpretations of the old symbols, so MTh(N) and Mn<b for every n.

F2step 1.1
3.1

If h:NM were an isomorphism, preservation of 0 gives h(0)=0M, and preservation of S inductively gives h(n)=nM. Surjectivity would give b=h(k)=kM for some k. But step 2.1 would then say b<b, contradicting Mx¬(x<x), a sentence true in N and therefore in its theory. Hence no isomorphism exists.

F1step 2.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

15 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources