When to use Skolem constant and a skolem function?

∀x [∃y Animal (y) ∧ ¬Loves(x, y)] ∨ [∃z Loves(z, x)] In the CNF conversion process, at the skolemize step, why the above statement use skolem function rather than a constant like 'A' or 'B' for ∃z...

- compactness theorem: any theory w arbitrarily large al finite models, or 1 infinite model, has models of al cardinality (this is Upward Löwenheim–#Skolem theorem). So, for instance, there are nonstandard models of #Peanoarithmetic with uncountably many 'natural numbers

infinite structures can never be discriminated in FO: Löwenheim– #Skolem theorem, => no fo theory w infinite model can have a unique model up to #isomorphism.

The most famous example is probably Skolem's theorem, that there is a countable non-standard model of arithmetic.

deductive system d w semantic theory is strongly complete if every sentence P that is a semantic consequence of a set of sentences S Γ can be derived in d from s
whenever Γ ⊨ P, then also Γ ⊢ P. Completeness of fol was by #Gödel
Part credit #Skolem.
deductive system d w semantic theory is strongly complete if every sentence P that is a semantic consequence of a set of sentences S Γ can be derived in d from s
whenever Γ ⊨ P, then also Γ ⊢ P. Completeness of fol was by #Gödel
Part credit #Skolem.