If a consistent propositional theory locally omits every member of a countable family of propositional types, it has a Boolean valuation omitting them all. One may also impose any finite condition consistent with the theory. Successively extend the condition by a negated member of the next type; local omission preserves consistency. The propositional compactness theorem then supplies the valuation. Countability of the ambient language and decidability of consistency are not needed for this argument.
Relative to a consistent propositional theory , a nonprincipal propositional type has no formula consistent with that implies every member modulo . Equivalently, for each finite condition consistent with , some member leaves consistent. This is the local omission condition for the extended omitting types theorem for propositional logic.
A propositional type is a set of propositional formulas; a Boolean valuation realizes it if every member is true, and omits it if at least one member is false. A consistent propositional theory locally omits if every formula which implies all members of modulo is refutable modulo . Equivalently, whenever is consistent, there is a for which is consistent. For a consistent propositional type, this says that it is a nonprincipal propositional type.
The extended omitting types theorem for propositional logic says that if a consistent locally omits each of a countable family , there is one Boolean valuation satisfying and omitting them all. It also works inside any prescribed finite condition consistent with .
To prove it, start with such a condition , taking when none is prescribed. At stage , choose such that
Such a choice exists by local omission. More explicitly, failure would imply for every , hence , contradicting the stage invariant. Every finite subset of lies inside a consistent stage. By the propositional compactness theorem and the completeness theorem for propositional logic, it has a Boolean valuation. That Boolean valuation satisfies and makes the selected member of every type false. All types are therefore omitted simultaneously. No effective test for consistency is assumed, and the argument does not require the ambient propositional language to be countable. Only the family of omission requirements is countable.