Paper detail

Interpreting a field in its Heisenberg group

We improve on and generalize a 1960 result of Maltsev. For a field $F$, we denote by $H(F)$ the Heisenberg group with entries in $F$. Maltsev showed that there is a copy of $F$ defined in $H(F)$, using existential formulas with an arbitrary non-commuting pair $(u,v)$ as parameters. We show that $F$ is interpreted in $H(F)$ using computable $Σ_1$ formulas with no parameters. We give two proofs. The first is an existence proof, relying on a result of Harrison-Trainor, Melnikov, R. Miller, and Montalbán. This proof allows the possibility that the elements of $F$ are represented by tuples in $H(F)$ of no fixed arity. The second proof is direct, giving explicit finitary existential formulas that define the interpretation, with elements of $F$ represented by triples in $H(F)$. Looking at what was used to arrive at this parameter-free interpretation of $F$ in $H(F)$, we give general conditions sufficient to eliminate parameters from interpretations.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.