 $V$, and an injective homomorphism $f:\A\to \wp(V)$ such that $\bigcap_{x\in X_i} f(x)=\emptyset$ for each $i\in \lambda$.

The idea is exactly like the previous proof, except that now we have a union of $<{}^{\omega}2$ no where dense sets; the required ultrafilter to build the representation we need lies outside this union. $MA$ offers solace here because it implies that such a union can be written as a countable union, and again the Baire category theorem readily applies.

But without $MA$, if the given algebra is countable and completely additive, and if the types are maximal, then we can also omit $<{} ^{\omega}2$ types. This [*is indeed* ]{} provable in $ZFC$, without any additional assumptions at all. For brevity, when we have an omitting types theore, like the previos one, we say that the hypothesis implies existence of a representation omitting the given set of non-principl types.

Let $\A\in SA_n$ be a countable, let $\lambda<{}^{\omega}2$ and $\bold F=(F_i: i<\lambda)$ be a family of non principal ultrafilters. Then there is a single representation that omits these non-principal ultrafilters.

One can easily construct two representations that overlap only on principal ultrafilters [@h]. With a pinch of diagonalization this can be pushed to countable many. But even more, using ideas of Shelah [@Shelah] thm 5.16, this this can be further pushed to $^{\omega}2$ many representations. Such representations are not necessarily pair-wise distinct, but they can be indexed by a set $I$ such that $|I|={}^{\omega}2$, and if $i, j\in I$, are distinct and there is an ultrafilter that is realized in the representations indexed by $i$ and $j$, then it is principal. Note that they can be the same representation. Now assume for contradiction that there is no representation omitting the given non-principal ultrafilters.

Then for all $i<{}^{\omega}2$, there exists $F$ such that $F$ is realized in $\B_i$. Let $\psi:{}^{\omega}2\to \wp(\bold F)$, be defined by $\psi(i)=\{
$ V$, and an injective homomorphism $ f:\A\to \wp(V)$ such that $ \bigcap_{x\in X_i } f(x)=\emptyset$ for each $ i\in \lambda$. 

 The idea is exactly like the previous proof, except that nowadays we have a coupling of $ < { } ^{\omega}2 $ no where dense sets; the required ultrafilter to build the theatrical performance we need lies outside this union. $ MA$ offer solace here because it implies that such a coupling can be written as a countable union, and again the Baire class theorem readily applies. 

 But without $ MA$, if the given algebra is countable and completely linear, and if the types are maximal, then we can also exclude $ < { } ^{\omega}2 $ types. This [ * is indeed * ] { } provable in $ ZFC$, without any additional premise at all. For brevity, when we have an omitting types theore, like the previos one, we read that the hypothesis implies existence of a representation exclude the given set of non - principl types. 

 Let $ \A\in SA_n$ be a countable, let $ \lambda<{}^{\omega}2 $ and $ \bold F=(F_i: i<\lambda)$ be a syndicate of non principal ultrafilters. Then there is a single representation that omits these non - principal ultrafilters. 

 One can easily construct two representations that overlap only on principal ultrafilters [ @h ]. With a pinch of diagonalization this can be pushed to countable many. But even more, using ideas of Shelah [ @Shelah ] thm 5.16, this this can be further pushed to $ ^{\omega}2 $ many representation. Such representations are not necessarily couple - fresh distinct, but they can be index by a set $ I$ such that $ |I|={}^{\omega}2 $, and if $ i, j\in I$, are distinct and there is an ultrafilter that is realized in the representations indexed by $ i$ and $ j$, then it is principal. notice that they can be the same representation. Now assume for contradiction that there is no representation omitting the given non - principal ultrafilters. 

 Then for all $ i<{}^{\omega}2 $, there exists $ F$ such that $ F$ is realized in $ \B_i$. Let $ \psi:{}^{\omega}2\to \wp(\bold F)$, be define by $ \psi(i)=\ {
 $V$, wnd an injective homomorkhism $f:\A\to \wp(V)$ suey that $\bigcal_{x\in X_i} w(x)=\emptyset$ for each $i\in \lambva$.

Thw ideq is exactly like the orevious iroof, excwpt uhat now we have e union of $<{}^{\omefw}2$ no xhere dense setx; the requhred ultrafiltar tl build the representation we need jies ouyslde this union. $MA$ psfera solace here because it implies tgat suci a union can br written as a countable ujion, and again the Baige category thejeem readily xpplies.

But without $MA$, jf the given algebra is countabue anb completeli zdfhtive, and ih the nypes are maxlkal, than we csn also omit $<{} ^{\pmeja}2$ ttpes. This [*is indeed* ]{} 'rovable in $ZFC$, withjut any agdntional assumptions ar qll. Fmr bsevigt, wfen wx hzve an ommtting typea theore, lije the previos one, ee way that the gypothqsys implies existence of a representatiot ojitting the given set od non-principl types.

Lej $\A\in SA_n$ fe a countable, let $\lambda<{}^{\omega}2$ and $\bold F=(F_i: i<\lambga)$ be x fcnily ud jon principal ultrafilters. Then there is a sigflt rvpresentation thab omits these non-ptijcokal ultrafiltets.

One cch sasily construct tao reprgsentarions thau ovetlap only on principal ultrqfilters [@h]. Wpth q pinch of diagonapization thns can be pished to countable many. But even more, ksing idezr of Shelah [@Shelxh] nhm 5.16, this this can be further [ushed to $^{\omeya}2$ many feprgsentatyons. Such gepresentations are not jecesdasily pair-wlse distinct, but they can be invxxed by a set $I$ subh that $|I|={}^{\jmega}2$, and if $i, j\in I$, are distincj and thexe is xn ultrafimter thet is realizqd in the repsgsentations iidexed by $i$ abd $j$, then ig is principal. Mote that they can ve the same represcntatkkn. Now assume fir xontradiction tnat thqrv ix gm representadion omkyting the given kon-orinvipal ultrafilters.

Than fkr all $i<{}^{\omega}2$, therr cxists $F$ wuch thae $F$ is realizrd in $\B_i$. Let $\psi:{}^{\omtga}2\to \xp(\bold F)$, be desined by $\psi(i)=\{
$V$, and an injective homomorphism $f:\A\to \wp(V)$ $\bigcap_{x\in f(x)=\emptyset$ for $i\in \lambda$. The previous except that now have a union $<{}^{\omega}2$ no where dense sets; the ultrafilter to build the representation we need lies outside this union. $MA$ offers here because it implies that such a union can be written as a union, again Baire theorem readily applies. But without $MA$, if the given algebra is countable and completely additive, and the types are maximal, then we can also $<{} ^{\omega}2$ types. This indeed* ]{} provable in $ZFC$, any assumptions at For when have an omitting theore, like the previos one, we say that the hypothesis implies existence of a representation omitting the set of Let $\A\in be countable, $\lambda<{}^{\omega}2$ and $\bold be a family of non principal is a single representation that omits these non-principal One can construct two representations that overlap only principal ultrafilters [@h]. With a pinch of diagonalization can be pushed to countable many. But even more, using ideas of Shelah [@Shelah] thm this can be further to $^{\omega}2$ many Such are necessarily distinct, but can be indexed by a set $I$ such that $|I|={}^{\omega}2$, and $i, j\in I$, are distinct and there is an ultrafilter realized the representations indexed $i$ and $j$, then is Note that they can same Now that is representation omitting the given ultrafilters. Then for all $i<{}^{\omega}2$, exists $F$ such that Let $\psi:{}^{\omega}2\to \wp(\bold F)$, be defined by $\psi(i)=\{
 $V$, and an injective homomorphiSm $f:\A\to \wp(V)$ sUch thAt $\bIgcAp_{X\in X_I} f(x)=\eMptyset$ for each $I\In \laMbda$.

The idea is exactly liKe the PrEViouS PrOof, exCept thaT NoW WE haVe A uNioN oF $<{}^{\OmEga}2$ no WheRe dense Sets; the reqUirEd Ultrafilter tO BuIld the reprEseNtation we neeD liEs outsIdE thIS unioN. $MA$ OfferS solacE Here beCause it imPlIEs that SUch a uniON CaN be wRitten as a countablE UnIOn, and again the BAire caTeGOrY THeoRem Readily appLiEs.

But WIthout $Ma$, If THE GivEN algebra is couNtable and coMPleTely adDiTivE, And if tHe typEs ARe mAximal, then wE can Also omit $<{} ^{\oMega}2$ tyPEs. This [*iS Indeed* ]{} pRovablE in $zFC$, WithOUt AnY adDiTIonAL aSsuMPtiOns at all. foR bRevitY, wheN WE HAve aN omIttiNg typEs theore, like tHe pReviOS onE, we saY that The hYpOthesIs implIes exIsTence of a represeNtatIon omittiNg tHe GivEn Set of NOn-prinCipL tyPes.

Let $\A\In SA_n$ be A CouNtABLE, lEt $\lambda<{}^{\omega}2$ and $\boLd f=(f_I: i<\Lambda)$ be A familY Of NoN PrincipaL uLtrAfilTERs. TheN theRE iS a single RepresENtAtIon that OmIts theSe Non-PriNcipaL UltrAfilteRs.

One can EasilY Construct two rePResentations tHAt OVErLAp onLy oN principal uLtraFIlteRs [@h]. WITh A piNCh of dIagonAlIZaTIon this can be pushed tO cOuntabLe manY. But even more, uSing ideas oF sHElah [@ShelAh] thM 5.16, ThIS this can be furtHer puShed to $^{\omegA}2$ Many reprEsentAtions. SuCh represeNTAtions arE noT neCesSarILY pAir-wise distinCT, But tHeY can be iNdeXed by a sEt $I$ SucH thAt $|I|={}^{\OmEga}2$, and if $i, J\in I$, are dIsTiNcT aNd tHere iS An ultrafIlTer ThAt iS realIZed in tHe repReseNtAtIOns Indexed BY $i$ AND $j$, thEn It Is prIncIpAl. NotE thaT TheY can be tHe same repResENtatIoN. NOw assumE for contradicTiOn that therE iS no RepresENTation omItting the given non-princiPAl ultraFilTers.

THen fOr all $i<{}^{\omeGa}2$, tHere exIstS $f$ such tHat $F$ is RealiZeD in $\b_I$. let $\psI:{}^{\OMeGa}2\tO \wP(\bold F)$, be deFINed By $\psi(I)=\{
 $V$, and an injective hom omorphism$f:\A \to  \w p( V)$such  that $\bigcap _ {x\i n X_i} f(x)=\emptyset$  forea c h $i \ in  \lam bda$.
T he i dea  i sexa ct l ylikethe  previo us proof,exc ep t that now w e  h ave a unio n o f $<{}^{\ome ga} 2$ nowh ere dense  se ts; t he req u ired u ltrafilte rt o buil d  the re p r es enta tion we need lies ou t side this unio n. $MA $o ff e r s s ola ce here be ca use i t  implie s  t h a t  su c h a union can  be written asa coun ta ble union,  andag a inthe Baire c ateg ory theor em rea d ily app l ies.

B ut wit hou t $ MA$, if  t hegi v ena lg ebr a  is  countab le  a nd co mple t e l y  add iti ve,and i f the types a remaxi m al,  then  we c an a ls o omi t $<{}  ^{\o me ga}2$ types. Th is [ *is indee d*]{ } p ro vable in $ZF C$,  wi thout a ny addi t ion al a s su mptions at all. Fo rb r ev ity, whe n we h a ve  a n  omittin gtyp es t h e ore,like th e previo s one, we  s ay that  t he hyp ot hes isimpli e s ex istenc e of a r epres e ntation omitti n g the given s e to f  n o n-pr inc ipl types.
Let $\A\ in S A _n $ b e  a co untab le ,  l e t $\lambda<{}^{\ome ga }2$ an d $\b old F=(F_i: i <\lambda)$ b e  a famil y of no n  principal ult rafil ters. Then there is  a si ngle rep resentati o n  that om its  th ese  no n - pr incipal ultra f i lter s. 

One c aneasilycon str uct  tw orepresent ations t ha tov er lap  only on princ ip alul tra filte r s [@h] . Wit h api nc h  of  diagon a li z a tion  t hi s ca n b epushe d to cou ntablemany. But  ev e n mo re ,using i deas of Shela h[@Shelah]th m 5 .16, t h i s this c an be further pushed to $^{\ome ga} 2$ ma ny r epresenta tio ns. Su chr eprese ntatio ns ar enot n ecess a r il y p ai r-wise dis t i nct , but  t heycan beindexed by a set $ I $ s uch that $|I| ={} ^{\o m e ga }2$ ,  a n d i f$ i,j \ in I$, are dist inct and t he r eis an ultr a fil te r thatis real izedi n the r epresenta tions ind ex ed b y $i$  and $j$,then itis princi p al. N o te  that  th ey can  b e t he sa me rep r ese ntati on. No wassume  forco ntradict ion that there is no re presen tatio n o mitting t heg ive n non-pri ncip al ultrafi lte rs. 

The n f o r all  $i< { }^ {\o m ega}2 $, t h ere exist s  $ F$s u ch  that $F$ i s r eal izedin$ \B_i$.  Let  $\psi:{}^{\omega } 2\to \wp(\bold  F)$ , bedef i nedby  $\psi(i)=\{
 $V$,_and an_injective homomorphism $f:\A\to \wp(V)$_such that_$\bigcap_{x\in_X_i} f(x)=\emptyset$_for_each $i\in \lambda$.

The_idea is exactly_like the previous proof,_except that now_we_have a union of $<{}^{\omega}2$ no where dense sets; the required ultrafilter to build_the_representation we_need_lies_outside this union. $MA$ offers_solace here because it implies_that such_a union can be written as a countable_union,_and again the_Baire category theorem readily applies.

But without $MA$, if the_given algebra is countable and completely_additive, and if_the_types_are maximal, then we_can also omit $<{} ^{\omega}2$ types._This [*is indeed* ]{} provable in_$ZFC$, without any additional assumptions at all._For brevity, when we have an_omitting types theore, like the_previos one,_we say that the hypothesis_implies existence of_a representation_omitting the given_set of non-principl types.

Let $\A\in SA_n$_be a countable,_let $\lambda<{}^{\omega}2$ and $\bold F=(F_i: i<\lambda)$_be_a family of_non_principal_ultrafilters. Then_there is a_single_representation that_omits_these non-principal ultrafilters.

One can easily construct_two_representations that overlap only on principal ultrafilters_[@h]. With a pinch_of_diagonalization this can be_pushed to countable many. But_even more, using ideas of Shelah_[@Shelah] thm_5.16, this_this can be further pushed to $^{\omega}2$ many representations. Such representations_are not necessarily pair-wise distinct, but_they can be indexed_by a_set_$I$ such that_$|I|={}^{\omega}2$,_and if_$i, j\in I$, are distinct and there_is an_ultrafilter that is realized in the_representations indexed by $i$_and_$j$, then it is principal. Note_that they can be the same_representation. Now assume for contradiction_that_there_is no representation omitting the_given non-principal ultrafilters.

Then for all $i<{}^{\omega}2$,_there exists $F$_such that $F$ is realized in $\B_i$._Let_$\psi:{}^{\omega}2\to \wp(\bold F)$, be defined by_$\psi(i)=\{