Not signed in (Sign In)

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 adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book 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 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 homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limit 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 nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry 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 stack string string-theory subobject superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft 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).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 20th 2010

    I merged coherent formula into coherent logic and added redirects; I didn’t see a good reason to keep them separate. Perhaps the page should actually be called coherent theory to match with geometric theory, or vice versa, any thoughts?

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 1st 2012

    Prompted by the discussion in the other thread I added many of the nice properties of coherent logic to coherent logic.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeFeb 1st 2012
    • (edited Feb 1st 2012)

    Thank you! These are very useful additions. I don’t feel strongly about renaming the page ’coherent theory’.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeMay 31st 2012

    Is it appropriate to include coherent site as a redirect to coherent coverage? I think the terminology is used.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMay 31st 2012


    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2012

    Done. But why does geometric coverage also redirect there?

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 2nd 2012

    Presumably because geometric = infinitary-coherent?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeJun 3rd 2012

    I see the relationship, but the concept is not discussed there. Is it the same thing, just on a coherent category that happens to be infinitary-coherent? Or is it a different coverage?

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012

    It’s different; I edited the page.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeJun 5th 2012

    OK, thanks.

  1. Corrected number of reference to the elephant; D1.5.13 instead of D.1.5.9

    Peter Arndt

    diff, v15, current

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorThomas Holder
    • CommentTimeJun 20th 2020

    Added reference to

    • M.-F. Coste, M. Coste, Théories cohérentes et topos cohérents , Séminaire de théorie des catégories dirigé par Jean Bénabou Mai 1975. (pdf)

    diff, v16, current

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorvarkor
    • CommentTimeFeb 9th 2021

    Clarified sentence about algebraic theories being coherent, to avoid the possible misconception that every cartesian category is a coherent category. I think this is the meaning that was intended; please correct me if I’ve misunderstood the statement.

    diff, v17, current

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 10th 2021

    Heh, this is one of the problems with using the word “theory” to refer to the classifying category of a theory. I would say the intended meaning is that a syntactic algebraic theory simply is a coherent theory without any modification required. This is a much more trivial observation than the theorem about embeddings of categories.

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeMay 9th 2021

    Added more detail about what it means syntactically versus semantically for “every algebraic theory to be a coherent theory”.

    diff, v19, current

  2. added example of the theory of an elementary topos.


    diff, v22, current