Maximal theories (Q1093629): Difference between revisions

This paper studies the concept of ``maximality'' in the lattice L of r.e. theories of proportions based on a fixed recursive set of literals \(\{P_ i:\) \(i\in \omega \}\) (or equivalently, the lattice of r.e. ideals in the recursive copy of the countable atomless Boolean algebra). \textit{D. A. Martin} and \textit{M. B. Pour-El} [`Axiomatizable theories with few axiomatizable extensions' J. Symb. Logic 35, 205-209 (1970; Zbl 0209.012)] constructed an r.e. theory T with few r.e. extensions: that is T is essentially undecidable and all r.e. extensions of T are principal over T. In fact, their T was also constructed as generated by \(\{P_ i:\) \(i\in A\}\cup \{\bar P_ j:\) \(j\in B\}\) for suitable A and B. We show such theories can exist in some but not all r.e. degrees, and they can have low degrees. Subsequent work of \textit{C. G. Jockusch}, \textit{M. Stob} and the author [``Array nonrecursive sets and multiple permitting arguments'' (in preparation)] have shown that such T occur in exactly the ``array nonrecursive'' degrees. The paper also studies other concepts of maximality in L and also in L' the lattice of r.e. sub-theories of a fixed deciable complete theory. The techniques are of course algebraic priority arguments.