This problem and its solution were given at class. I don't understand why the solution is the solution. Could someone please explain in detail?
I am sorry for not using MathJax: it isn't working for me, this didn't help.
Problem: find an example of an exists-sentence (a formula where every variable is under the existence quantifier) such that the sentence is true on an infinite model $M$ (i.e. a model with an infinite carrier), yet on every submodel of $M$, the sentence is false.
The signature to use was told to be an equivalence relation ~, and two different unary operators $f$ and $g$. The answer to the problem is $\exists x\exists y \neg(x\sim y)$.
Now, suppose $N<M$, $a$ and $b$ are in $N$, and $a\sim b$. The smallest submodel = $\{a, b, f(a), f(f(a)),\dots, f(b), f(f(b)), \dots, g(a), g(g(a)), \dots, g(b), g(g(b)), \dots\}$. I don't see how two non-equivalent elements could not exist in $N$.
Is my reasoning wrong? Could I have missed something obvious in class?
Thank you.
As Noah and Eric pointed out, the statement of the proplem is missing the word "proper" (the sentence should be false only on the proper substructures of $M$, since $M$ is alwaays a substructure of itself). And the problem can be solved vacuously by considering a structure $M$ with no proper substructures.
The solution as you described it makes no sense. Here's an example which does have proper substructures and which I believe is similar in spirit to the intention of the proposed solution (but simpler).
Consider the language $\{P,f\}$, where $P$ is a unary relation symbol and $f$ is a unary function symbol. Let $M = \mathbb{N}$, where $P^M$ holds only of $0$ and $f^M$ is the successor function $f^M(n) = n+1$.
The substructures of $M$ are of the form $\{k,k+1,k+2,\dots\}$ for any $k$.
Consider the sentence $\exists x\, P(x)$. This sentence is true in $M$ (witnessed by $0$), but false in every proper substructure of $M$ (since no proper substructure of $M$ contains $0$).