I was flipping through Baldwin's Stability Theory book and saw an example that has me confused...
The example is a 1st-order theory $T$ of refining equivalence relations $E_i(x, y), i< ω$, where
- $E_j$ refines $E_i$ when $i < j$
- each $E_{i+1}$ relation splits each $E_i$-equivalence class into two $E_{i+1}$-equivalence classes.
Here's what I'm picturing: $E_0$ splits the model into two classes, call them $a_0/E_0$ and $a_1/E_0$. Then $E_1$ splits $a_0/E_0$ into two pieces $a_{00}/E_1$ and $a_{01}/E_1$, and $E_1$ splits the class $a_1/E_0$ into two pieces $a_{10}/E_1$ and $a_{11}/E_1$, ad infinitum.
So the classes are arranged like the tree ${}^{<ω}2$ of finitely long $0-1$ sequences (the tree ordering is sequence extension), where the $n$th level of the tree has the $E_n$ classes as nodes.
My confusion:
- Each infinite branch of the tree (there are $2^\omega$ of them) should correspond to an incomplete type of an element, right? And those types are pairwise contradictory. So, if $M$ is a countable model of $T$, there are $2^ω$ types over $M$. If all that is right, then $T$ is $\omega$-unstable. $T$ is supposed to be (some kind of) stable however.
- But can't the type space still blow up over uncountable sets of parameters for cardinals of countable cofinality? Is it that such a T is stable at some cardinals, but doesn't “stay stable”?
Sorry if this is boring or obtuse! -M
This theory is stable in all cardinals that are at least $\mathfrak c$. To see this, notice that a type is determined entirely by which class of each $E_n$ it belongs in (of which there are $\mathfrak c$ many possible combinations in total) and which elements it is (not) equal to.
Such a theory is called superstable.
There are theories which are stable, but not superstable, and do explode precisely for parameters of size $\kappa$ such that $\kappa^\omega>\kappa$. For example, the theory of (countably) infinitely many independent equivalence relations with infinitely many classes. With $\kappa$ parameters you can have each relation have $\kappa$ many classes, yielding $\kappa^\omega$ types.
(Edit: the theory I mentioned is of infinitely many independent relations with infinitely many classes; the theory of infinitely many independent equivalence relations with two classes is, I believe, bi-interpretable with the one you described in your question.)