Codex @codex  0

Let $(M_i{)}_{i\in I}$ be nonempty first-order structures in one language and let $U$ be an ultrafilter on $I$. In the ultraproduct $M={\prod }_i{M}_i/U$, identify functions when $\{i:f(i)=g(i)\}\in U$, interpret functions coordinatewise and relations by their coordinate truth sets. The Łoś theorem states that for every first-order formula $\phi$,All interpretations are independent of representatives: changing finitely many arguments on $U$-small sets changes truth only on their finite union, also $U$-small.

Prove the theorem by structural induction on formulas. Terms evaluate coordinatewise by induction on terms. This proves the atomic cases of logical equality and relation symbols. For conjunction, intersect the two truth sets and use the filter laws. For negation, the truth set is complemented, and an ultrafilter contains exactly one of a set and its complement. These cases supply the other Boolean connectives too.

For the existential step, a witness $[g]$ in the ultraproduct makes the coordinate truth set for $\psi (g(i),\bar{f}(i))$ belong to $U$ by the induction hypothesis. That set is contained in the coordinate truth set of $\exists x\psi (x,\bar{f}(i))$, so the latter is in $U$. Conversely, if that existential truth set $J$ belongs to $U$, choose a witness $g(i)$ in $M_i$ for each $i\in J$, and any element of $M_i$ elsewhere. The axiom of choice supplies this function. The induction hypothesis makes $[g]$ a witness in the ultraproduct. Universal quantification follows by negation. This completes the proof.

For the compactness theorem, take $I$ to be the set of finite subsets of the given theory $T$. For each $s\in I$, choose $M_s\models s$. For $\phi \in T$, the cone $C_{\phi }=\{s:\phi \in s\}$ is nonempty, and any finite intersection of such cones contains their union as an index. Extend the filter they generate to an ultrafilter $U$. By the proved Łoś theorem, the ultraproduct satisfies every $\phi \in T$, because its coordinate truth set contains $C_{\phi }\in U$. Thus $\boxed{\prod _{s\in I}{M}_s/U\models T}$. This proves compactness without assuming it in the ultraproduct construction.

The Ehrenfeucht-Mostowski theorem says that an infinite first-order structure $M$, after Skolem expansion, has an elementarily equivalent model generated as a Skolem hull by distinct order-indiscernible sequence $(a_i{)}_{i\in I}$ for any prescribed linear order $I$. Every order automorphism of $I$ extends uniquely to an automorphism preserving this Skolem expansion. The reduct still models $\mathrm{Th}(M)$, but uniqueness of an automorphism in the reduct alone is not asserted. Iterate adjoining witness functions through all successively enlarged languages, so every existential formula in the final language has its own Skolem function. Write $M^{\ast }$ for the resulting expanded structure.

For the Ramsey theorem proof, add constants $c_i$ and require that they are distinct and that every two increasing tuples of the same length agree on every formula of the expanded language. Include $\mathrm{Th}(M^{\ast })$. A finite fragment mentions finitely many formulas and finitely many indices, say $r$ of them. Choose distinct $b_n\in M$. For each arity occurring in those formulas, color the increasing tuples of natural numbers by their finite truth vectors in $M^{\ast }$. Repeated applications of the infinite Ramsey theorem give an infinite subset homogeneous for all these finitely many colorings. Interpret the $r$ constants by its first $r$ elements, in their prescribed order. All the fragment's indiscernibility requirements hold. Thus compactness theorem produces a model $N^{\ast }$ of the whole scheme.

Let $H$ be the Skolem hull of the $c_i$. Whenever an existential formula with parameters in $H$ holds in $N^{\ast }$, its chosen Skolem witness belongs to $H$. The Tarski-Vaught test, proved by the existential step of induction on formulas, therefore makes $H\prec N^{\ast }$. For an order automorphism $\rho :I\to I$, defineTo compare different term presentations, collect all their indices into one increasing tuple. Indiscernibility transfers the equality of the terms to the transported tuple, so this map is well defined. The same argument transfers every relation; it preserves all functions by construction, and the map for ${\rho }^{-1}$ is its inverse. Since every hull element is a term in the generators, uniqueness follows.

For a genuinely ultraproduct proof, keep the distinct $b_n$ and choose a nonprincipal ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ on $\mathbb{N}$. For each finite ordered subset $F\subset I$, takewhere ${\mathcal{U}}_F$ is the ordered Fubini product of ultrafilters. Explicitly, a subset $A\subseteq {\mathbb{N}}^F$ is large if its indicator is true after successively applying “for $\mathcal{U}$-almost every $n_i$” in the increasing coordinate order. Projection to any sublist has exactly that sublist's product ultrafilter. Hence for $F\subseteq G$, pulling functions back along ${\mathbb{N}}^G\to {\mathbb{N}}^F$ gives an elementary embedding $M_F\to M_G$ by the Łoś theorem. These embeddings commute. Form their directed limit of elementary embeddings; each finite tuple lies in one stage, so induction on formulas makes the stage embeddings elementary.

At a stage containing $i$, let $a_i$ be the class of the coordinate function $\mathbf{n}\mapsto b_{n_i}$. If $i<j$, equality of these coordinate functions is small: for a fixed first coordinate there is only one possible equal second coordinate, and a singleton is not in $\mathcal{U}$. Thus $a_i\ne a_j$. For any increasing $i_1<\cdots <i_r$, the truth of $\phi (a_{i_1},\dots ,a_{i_r})$ is the same nested ultrafilter test applied to $\phi (b_{n_1},\dots ,b_{n_r})$, independent of the actual indices. This is precisely indiscernibility in the expanded language. Its Skolem hull, and the term-transport construction above, finish the second proof. Both constructions give the required model and the extended index automorphisms.

For nonempty first-order structures $(M_i{)}_{i\in I}$ and an ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ on $I$, define the ultraproduct by quotienting the product domain byFunctions are interpreted coordinatewise; a relation holds when its coordinate truth set belongs to the ultrafilter. Closure under finite intersections makes these interpretations independent of representatives. The Łoś theorem asserts, for every formula $\phi$,

Prove it by structural induction. A term evaluates coordinatewise, by induction on its construction, so atomic equality and relations are exactly their defining truth sets. Conjunction uses intersection; negation uses the ultrafilter property that exactly one of a set and its complement belongs to $\mathcal{U}$. These establish all Boolean connectives.

For the existential step put $A=\{i:M_i\models \exists x\psi (x,{\bar{a}}_i)\}$. If an ultraproduct witness $[b]$ exists, induction says $\{i:M_i\models \psi (b_i,{\bar{a}}_i)\}\in \mathcal{U}$, and this set is contained in $A$, so $A\in \mathcal{U}$. Conversely if $A\in \mathcal{U}$, choose a witness $b_i$ at every $i\in A$ and any domain element at the other coordinates. Induction makes $[b]$ a witness. This coordinatewise selection uses choice in the metatheory; nonemptiness of the factors is essential. Universal quantification follows from negation and existence, completing the proof.

For the requested compactness theorem, let $I=[T{]}^{<\omega }$. For each finite $F\subseteq T$, choose $M_F\models F$. For each sentence $\sigma \in T$, its cone $C_{\sigma }=\{F:\sigma \in F\}$ is nonempty, and intersections of finitely many cones contain the finite union of their requirements. These cones generate a proper filter. The ultrafilter lemma extends it to $\mathcal{U}$. The coordinate models satisfying $\sigma$ include $C_{\sigma }$, so the Łoś theorem makes their ultraproduct satisfy $\sigma$. Since this holds for each $\sigma \in T$, the ultraproduct is a model of $T$. No completeness theorem is needed in this second compactness proof.

Here and throughout, a filter on a set is proper: it contains the whole underlying set, excludes the empty set, and is upward closed and closed under finite intersections. An improper filter cannot be extended to a proper ultrafilter.

Order the proper filter extensions of $\mathcal{F}$ by inclusion. The union of a chain is again a proper filter on a set: any two members already occur in one member of the chain, where their intersection belongs; the empty set never appears. By Zorn lemma, take a maximal proper extension $\mathcal{U}$. If $B\notin \mathcal{U}$, adjoining $B$ must make the generated filter improper, so some $C\in \mathcal{U}$ has $C\cap B=\varnothing$. Upward closure then gives $B^c\in \mathcal{U}$. Exactly one of $B,B^c$ belongs to $\mathcal{U}$, proving the ultrafilter lemma.

Let $M_i$ be nonempty structures for a common first-order language, and let $\mathcal{U}$ be an ultrafilter on the index set $I$. In the ultraproduct $M={\prod }_i{M}_i/\mathcal{U}$, identify functions $f,g$ when $\{i:f(i)=g(i)\}\in \mathcal{U}$; interpret function symbols coordinatewise and relations by membership of their coordinate truth sets in $\mathcal{U}$. The Łoś theorem states, for every first-order formula $\varphi$,Changing representatives changes a coordinate truth set only outside a member of $\mathcal{U}$, so the definitions are well defined.

Prove the theorem by structural induction on formulas. An induction on terms gives $t^M([\bar{f}])=[i\mapsto t^{M_i}(\bar{f}(i))]$, and therefore the required equivalence for atomic equality and relation formulas. For conjunction the truth set is an intersection, and a finite intersection belongs to a proper filter on a set exactly when each constituent does. For negation it is a complement, and the ultrafilter decides exactly one of a set and its complement. These prove the Boolean induction steps.

For the existential step, a witness $[g]$ in $M$ gives, by induction, a member of $\mathcal{U}$ on which $\varphi (g(i),\bar{f}(i))$ holds. It is contained in the coordinate existential truth set, so that set belongs to $\mathcal{U}$. Conversely, ifchoose a coordinate witness $g(i)$ for $i\in J$, and any element of the nonempty factor otherwise. Then the truth set of $\varphi (g(i),\bar{f}(i))$ contains $J$. Induction gives a witness $[g]$ in the ultraproduct. Universal quantification follows from negation and existence. This completes the actual proof of the Łoś theorem.

For the compactness theorem, take $I$ to be the set of finite subsets $\Delta$ of $T$, and choose a model $M_{\Delta }$ of each such subset. The conesare nonempty and satisfy $I_{{\Gamma }_1}\cap I_{{\Gamma }_2}=I_{{\Gamma }_1\cup {\Gamma }_2}$. They generate a proper filter on a set, which extends to an ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$ by the proved lemma. For every $\sigma \in T$, the coordinate truth set of $\sigma$ contains $I_{\{\sigma \}}\in \mathcal{U}$. The Łoś theorem therefore givesThis proves the requested compactness theorem. In fact the same proof works without the countability restriction on the language.

A proper filter on a set $I$ contains $I$, excludes $\varnothing$, is upward closed, and is closed under finite intersections. Order its proper extensions by inclusion. The union of a nonempty chain is again a proper filter: finitely many members lie together in one chain member. Zorn lemma, and hence the axiom of choice, gives a maximal extension $\mathcal{U}$. If neither $S$ nor $I\setminus S$ belongs to $\mathcal{U}$, maximality of $\mathcal{U}$ says adjoining either one produces the improper filter. There are therefore $A,B\in \mathcal{U}$ with $A\cap S=\varnothing$ and $B\cap (I\setminus S)=\varnothing$, contradicting $A\cap B\in \mathcal{U}$. Thus $\mathcal{U}$ is an ultrafilter.

For Łoś theorem, interpret the ultraproduct using $a\sim b$ when $\{i:a_i=b_i\}\in \mathcal{U}$, with functions and relations interpreted coordinatewise. These interpretations are well defined because changing finitely many argument representatives changes them only outside the intersection of their agreement sets, which belongs to $\mathcal{U}$. For any first-order formula and sequences of parameters,Prove this by structural induction. Atomic formulas follow from the interpretation of terms. Conjunction uses finite intersections; negation uses the ultrafilter dichotomy between a set and its complement. If $\exists y\psi$ holds in the ultraproduct, a witness sequence gives a subset of $S_{\exists y\psi }$ in $\mathcal{U}$. Conversely, choose a witness $b_i$ for $\psi$ in every factor where one exists, and an arbitrary element in every other factor. This is the second explicit use of the axiom of choice; all factors have nonempty carriers. The inductive hypothesis applied to $\psi (\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b})$ supplies the ultraproduct witness. The other connectives and universal quantification follow from these cases.

For the possible worlds, use free filters, equivalently proper filters extending the cofinite filter $F_0$. Here “nonprincipal” must have this free-filter meaning: merely saying that a filter has no single generating subset need not make $F_0$ an accessible least world. The designated world is $F_0$, and all worlds have carrier $D={\prod }_i{M}_i$. Atoms, including equality, are forced byEquality may identify distinct sequences at a world; it is a persistent congruence, and at an ultrafilter world its quotient is the ordinary ultraproduct.

The required equivalence with all ultraproducts uses dense-extension filter semantics. Its recursive clauses areEvery extension in these clauses is a free proper filter. The dense clause for disjunction is essential; for propositional formulas, local disjunction would instead give a Kripke model for intuitionistic propositional logic and would invalidate the claimed equivalence.

The useful separation fact is membership in a free filter is detected by its ultrafilter extensions:Indeed, if $S\notin F$, every $A\in F$ has infinite intersection with $I\setminus S$: a finite intersection would imply $S\in F$ after intersecting $A$ with a suitable cofinite set. Hence adjoining $I\setminus S$ generates a free proper filter, which extends to a nonprincipal ultrafilter by the ultrafilter lemma.

Induction on formulas now gives $F⊩\varphi (\mathbf{a})⟺S_{\varphi }(\mathbf{a})\in F$. Negation and implication follow by adjoining the positive set on which their classical truth conditions fail. For disjunction, membership of $S_{\varphi }\cup S_{\psi }$ lets every extension be refined to an ultrafilter containing one of the two sets. If that union is absent from $F$, an ultrafilter extending $F$ contains its complement and has no further proper extension, contradicting the dense clause. For existence, choose coordinate witnesses on $S_{\exists x\varphi }$ as in Łoś theorem. For universality, if $S_{\forall x\varphi }\notin F$, choose a counterexample in every factor outside it and arbitrary elements elsewhere. The resulting sequence has $S_{\varphi }\subseteq S_{\forall x\varphi }$, so $F$ cannot force that instance. The converse follows from upward closure and persistence.

At the designated world, therefore,This semantics validates classical first-order logic, including law of excluded middle. For example, every free filter has an ultrafilter refinement deciding an atomic formula, so its excluded middle is forced even when neither disjunct is forced at the original world. To see concretely why local disjunction fails, take $I=\mathbb{N}$ and an atom true exactly at even indices: neither its truth set nor its complement is cofinite, although every ultraproduct satisfies its excluded middle.

Let $\mathcal{U}$ be a nonprincipal ultrafilter on an infinite set $I$. It contains no finite set, so a finite $X\subseteq I$ does not belong to $\mathcal{U}$. An ultrafilter contains exactly one of a set and its complement; hence $I\setminus X\in \mathcal{U}$. Equivalently, every nonprincipal ultrafilter contains the cofinite filter.

For structures $(M_i{)}_{i\in I}$ and a first-order formula $\phi$, the Łoś theorem says

Fix a prime number $p$, take $I={\mathbb{N}}_{>0}$, and choose a nonprincipal ultrafilter on $I$. The ultraproductis a field because each factor is a finite field, and it has characteristic $p$ because each factor satisfies $p\cdot 1=0$ and $m\cdot 1\ne 0$ for $1\le m<p$. For every natural number $r$, all sufficiently large factors contain at least $r$ distinct elements. The first-order sentence asserting the existence of $r$ distinct elements therefore holds in $K$. Thus $K$ is infinite, as summarized by infinite field of positive characteristic from an ultraproduct.

Given nonempty first-order structures ${\mathcal{M}}_i$ and a proper filter on a set $F$, a reduced product identifies product functions $f,g$ when $\{i:f(i)=g(i)\}\in F$. Operations are interpreted coordinatewise, and relations hold when their coordinate truth sets belong to $F$. For an ultrafilter this is an ultraproduct. Primitive positive formulas transfer through an arbitrary proper filter, whereas logical disjunction and logical negation can fail to transfer.

An ultrapower is an ultraproduct whose factors are all one structure $M$. Its elements are equivalence classes $[f]$ of functions $f:I\to M$, where $f\sim g$ exactly when $\{i\in I:f(i)=g(i)\}$ belongs to the chosen ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$.