a) For every instruction $\delta(q_i, \sigma) = \langle q_j, \sigma', R \rangle$, the sentence:
In other words, the same as the corresponding sentence in $\tau(M, w)$, except we add $\psi(y')$ at the end. ($\psi(y')$ ensures that the number $y'$ of the “next” configuration is different from all previous numbers 0, 0', ...)
b) For every instruction $\delta(q_i, \sigma) = \langle q_j, \sigma', L \rangle$, the sentence:
c) For every instruction $\delta(q_i, \sigma) = \langle q_j, \sigma', N \rangle$, the sentence:
Let $\tau'(M, w)$ be the conjunction of all the above sentences for Turing ma- chine $M$ and input $w$.
Lemma und.1. If $M$ started on input $w$ halts, then $\tau'(M, w) \land \alpha(M, w)$ has a finite model.
Proof. Let $\mathfrak{M}'$ be as in the proof of ??, except
where $n = \max(k, \text{len}(w))$ and $k$ is the least number such that $M$ started on input $w$ has halted after $k$ steps. We leave the verification that $\mathfrak{M}' \models$ $\tau(M, w) \land E(M, w)$ as an exercise. $\square$
Problem und.1. Complete the proof of Lemma und.1 by proving that $\mathfrak{M}' \models \tau(M, w) \land E(M, w)$.
Lemma und.2. If $\tau'(M, w) \land \alpha(M, w)$ has a finite model, then $M$ started on input w halts.
Proof. We show the contrapositive. Suppose that $M$ started on $w$ does not halt. If $\tau'(M,w) \land \alpha(M,w)$ has no model at all, we are done. So assume $\mathfrak{M}$ is a model of $\tau(M,w) \land \alpha(M,w)$. We have to show that it cannot be finite.