Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories accessible adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory history homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology newpage nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • copied from HoTT wiki

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • I have added at HomePage in the section Discussion a new sentence with a new link:

      If you do contribute to the nLab, you are strongly encouraged to similarly drop a short note there about what you have done – or maybe just about what you plan to do or even what you would like others to do. See Welcome to the nForum (nlabmeta) for more information.

      I had completly forgotton about that page Welcome to the nForum (nlabmeta). I re-doscivered it only after my recent related comment here.

    • making this a disambiguation page

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • More than half of this list is devoted to listing various proof assistants and formalization projects. Does this topic really warrant such an oversized representation in an article with a generic title “mathematics”?

      Also, Categories and Sheaves, Sheaves in Geometry and Logic, Higher Topos Theory are good books, but do they really deserve such a prominent placement on top of the article? I suggest removing them.

      diff, v42, current

    • Created:

      Not to be confused with Marston Morse.

      Anthony Perry Morse was a mathematician at the University of California, Berkeley, primarily working in geometric measure theory.

      He got his PhD degree in 1937 from Brown University, advised by Clarence Raymond Adams.

      Selected writings

      On the Morse–Kelley set theory:

      • Anthony P. Morse, A theory of sets, Pure and Applied Mathematics XVIII, Academic Press (1965), xxxi+130 pp. Second Edition, Pure and Applied Mathematics 108, Academic Press (1986), xxxii+179 pp. ISBN: 0-12-507952-4

      On the Morse–Sard lemma:

      • Anthony P. Morse, The Behavior of a Function on Its Critical Set, Annals of Mathematics 40:1 (1939), 62–70. doi.

      v1, current

    • Added:

      References

      A definitive source (by one of the authors of the theory) is

      • Anthony P. Morse, A theory of sets, Pure and Applied Mathematics XVIII, Academic Press (1965), xxxi+130 pp. Second Edition, Pure and Applied Mathematics 108, Academic Press (1986), xxxii+179 pp. ISBN: 0-12-507952-4

      diff, v6, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Checking what we have on free coproduct completion I was redirected to this old entry here. I think it will be easier to have a standalone entry on free coproduct completion, and I will create that now and change the redirects.

      But while I was here, I added some missing hyperlinks here and there. Such as to free cocompletion

      diff, v8, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Added a few additional descriptions of 1\Box_{\leq 1}, which is the same as Δ 1\Delta_{\leq 1}.

      diff, v18, current

    • adding statement and reference

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Added a table of contents to topos, a section on "special classes" and one on "higher toposes".

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • added to identity type a mentioning of the alternative definition in terms of inductive types (paths).

    • created some minimum at Cardy condition.

      Back then some kind soul provided these cobordism pictures at Frobenius algebra. Is that somebody still around and might easily provide also the picture for the Cardy condition?

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • Added a concrete example: inserters of categories.

      diff, v5, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • I pasted in something Mike wrote on sketches and accessible models to sketch. But now it needs tidying up, and I’m wondering if it might have been better placed at accessible category. Alternatively we start a new page on sketch-theoretic model theory. Ideas?

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • brief category:people-entry for hyperlinking references

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • I did a bit of reorganization and added more examples at paraconsistent logic, including some comments about linear logic.

      Here I copy an old discussion from that page:


      I made a big change here; I would argue that the failure of B\bot \vdash B means that ‘\bot’ simply doesn't mean \bot; but in any case, I've always seen the definition given in terms of negation. In particular, dual-intuitionistic logic has B\bot \vdash B (just as intuitionistic logic has BB \vdash \top) but is still considered paraconsistent.

      Finn: Hmm. (I presume you meant the ’)’ to come before ’but is still…’; as it stands that last statement is false.) The definitions I’ve seen correspond to what I wrote, but you make a good point – if we want to think of LJ opLJ^{op} as paraconsistent then the definition by means of ex falso quodlibet does seem wrong. If this is the standard definition, then I certainly won’t object – I’ll just avoid relying on philosophers for information about logic in future.

      Toby: Yeah, I'm sure about the standard; our links agree with me too. (And thanks for catching my parenthesis.) As for philosophers, they're not always as precise as mathematicians; that may be the problem. Not to mention, there's a tendency not to include \bot as a logical constant but instead to simply define it as A¬AA \wedge \neg{A} (after proving that these are all equivalent, but ignoring the possibility of an empty model), which leads to conflating the two versions. (In a paraconsistent logic where A¬AB¬BA \wedge \neg{A} \equiv B \wedge \neg{B} need not hold, one ought to catch the inapplicability of this definition, but maybe not.)

      Finn: I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there: I think ’ex falso quodlibet’ means A\bot\vdash A (as you said above, this says that ’\bot’ means \bot, the least truth-value), but it seems my sources may have meant A¬ABA\wedge\neg A\vdash B, without saying so. This is why I never cared much for what’s called ’philosophical logic’ – even though I’m a philosophy graduate studying logic (albeit in a computer science department), it was always too fuzzy for my tastes.

      Thanks for clearing this up. Obviously your version should stand.

      Toby: You're welcome. But your fancy Latin reminds me that what we have here is technically really the combination of the law of non-contradiction (any contradiction is false: A¬AA \wedge \neg{A} \equiv \bot) and ex falso quodlibet (anything follows from falsehood: B\bot \vdash B), so I changed the name above.

      Finn: Right – I was going to mention that (no, really), but forgot. Perhaps we should incorporate some of this discussion into the article proper, to help resolve any imprecision in other sources. I’ll do that, if you’d rather not, but not now – it’s way past bedtime here in GMT-land.

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current

    • Page created, but author did not leave any comments.

      Anonymous

      v1, current