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 adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science connection constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry goodwillie-calculus 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 homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie lie-theory limit limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nonassociative noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar 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 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.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010
    • (edited Apr 28th 2010)

    Added quadrability of a cospan (and coquadrability of a span) as well as quadrability/coquadrability of a category C. The word "quadrable" means "squarable", but "squarable" isn't a real word. The word "quadrable" is the proper translation of the French "carrable".

    Note that while the translation "quadrable" is uncommon, the term "carrable" in French is standard.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I edited the entry a bit:

    • added an Idea-section;

    • renamed the ambient category from CC to 𝒞\mathcal{C} so that the symbol doesn’t collide with that for its objects, AA, BB, CC;

    • linked to it from span and cospan, so that there is a chance that people find this entry.

    It would be good if you could include a reference that uses the terminology “quadrable”.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010
    • (edited Apr 28th 2010)

    I've only seen the term "carrable" in French (It's in Toen's cours 2 of Toen's notes for example, but if you search for it on google, you will find that it's standard terminology in french). The corresponding word in English is "quadrable" (according to the dictionary). If you want to change it to "squarable", then I don't mind that either, but "quadrable" is proper English, while "squarable" isn't.

    I've seen "carrable" used in English as well, citing the French term, but there is no reason why we shouldn't translate it.

    In conclusion, you can change the term to any of the three "quadrable", "squarable", or "carrable," although I prefer the first one, but I don't really care if you change it to what you prefer. I've provided a correct definition, and the page is complete enough for anyone who would look up the definition, so if you'd like to add anything else (or change the page), be my guest.

    (Perhaps a redirect for carrable and squarable would be in order as well.)

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    In conclusion, you can change the term to any of the three “quadrable”, “squarable”, or “carrable,” although I prefer the first one.

    I think the important thing is that we have this remark on terminology in the nLab entry. I’ll put it in there now.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010
    • (edited Apr 28th 2010)

    I object to the use of the term presheaf category, because it is not taking values in sets.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    okay, if you wish, I make it “functor category”.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I also made a mistake when I was changing around the page (in particular, in giving the map *_F, I forgot to add an ^op over Sp in the second [Sp,C] of the boxes(I had originally written everything dually)). I would fix it, but it seems like you're still editing it

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I am done editing now (got distracted by something else in the middle of it). Please go over it.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010
    • (edited Apr 28th 2010)

    Alright, I fixed a few typos (that I made), and it looks good to me now.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    Thanks. Funny to me that the French have a common word for this, but the English have never felt the need for it. (I certainly never have.) I’d be more inclined to name the page quadrable cospan, thoughts?

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    Well, it would be completely pointless to make coquadrable span and quadrable cospan and (co)-quadrability of a category all separate articles. This title gives you all things quadrable!

    Anyway, a filter on a poset is a quadrable upper set. In fact, the reason that I wrote this entry was so I could say that.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    Of course, what I meant was that I would be inclined to make the title of the page “quadrable cospan” with “quadrability” a redirect, rather than vice versa. I think our usual convention is to name pages after things in mathematics, rather than properties.

    I would be inclined to regard that definition of a filter as making simple things difficult, but YMMV. (-: I think it’s also wrong in that it doesn’t require the filter to be nonempty, and even then it only agrees with the usual definition if your poset is upwards-directed, since otherwise not every pair of elements can be completed to a cospan.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I think it's also wrong in that it doesn't require the filter to be nonempty, and even then it only agrees with the usual definition if your poset is upwards-directed, since otherwise not every pair of elements can be completed to a cospan.

    True.

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorSridharRamesh
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    If you want to change it to “squarable”, then I don’t mind that either, but “quadrable” is proper English, while “squarable” isn’t.

    I don’t really care what it’s called, but what’s improper about “squarable”?

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    It's not a word! Quadrable is the word meaning squarable!

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorSridharRamesh
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010
    • (edited Apr 28th 2010)

    Exclamation points notwithstanding, I guess I don’t understand what the argument is that “it’s not a word”. I mean, it’s a term that people frequently use, with various clear (albeit context-dependent) agreed-upon meanings… It seems to me there’s all the same kinds of evidence for “squarable” being a word as there is for “quadrable” or even, say, “functor” being words (not that I would consider it to take terribly much for a thing to “be a word”). As far as I’m concerned, “quadrable” and “squarable” are synonyms. But, whatever; I don’t terribly care. I was just curious what the reasoning was.

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    No, quadrable is in the dictionary!

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I was just curious what the reasoning was.

    I suppose Harry is just indulging in advanced procrastination of his homework. ;-)

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    I suppose Harry is just indulging in advanced procrastination of his homework. ;-)

    If procrastination were a marketable skill, I probably still wouldn't make money for it because I'd procrastinate until I hit the deadline for filling out the paperwork.

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2010

    For what it’s worth, “quadrable” sounds much better to my ears than “squarable”. I keep wanting to say “scrabble” or some such other mangling: the “r” in the middle gets slurred when I try to say it. Both would be fantastic scrabble words, of course (you’d have to do something like starting with “able” and extending left).

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2010

    Yes, they’d be good Scrabble words all right – but the fact they’re both nine letters long is pretty inconvenient. Probably an expert wouldn’t leave -able along a triple word line! :-)

    • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2010

    Since when have mathematicians ever been bothered by calling something by a word that isn’t in the dictionary? Some of the best words in mathematics aren’t in the dictionary – if you make up your own word, you can be sure no one has ever used it to mean something else before!

    • CommentRowNumber23.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2010

    Since when have mathematicians ever been bothered by calling something by a word that isn't in the dictionary? Some of the best words in mathematics aren't in the dictionary -- if you make up your own word, you can be sure no one has ever used it to mean something else before!

    Because it's the correct translation of the french word "carrable"! I'm not going to change it, but if you feel compelled to change it, go ahead. Just know that I'll hate you forever for it :'(

    =p

    • CommentRowNumber24.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2010

    hey, I’m just joking around here. I like quadrable better than squarable; squarable sounds to me like a number xx such that x 2x^2 exists. But if I liked squarable better, I wouldn’t hesitate to use it despite its not being in the dictionary. (-:

    • CommentRowNumber25.
    • CommentAuthorHarry Gindi
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2010

    hey, I'm just joking around here.

    What a coincidence, me too! =)

    • CommentRowNumber26.
    • CommentAuthorlemastero
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2019

    Link: http://www.math.univ-toulouse.fr/~toen/m2.html is invalid. There is no webpage of Bertrand Toen at Toulouse.

    Changed to: https://perso.math.univ-toulouse.fr/btoen/files/2015/02/cours2.pdf and name of the course to mach info from Bertrand Toen home page (https://perso.math.univ-toulouse.fr/btoen/videos-lecture-notes-etc/).

    Add reference to André Joyal publication Notes on Clans and Tribes that define and uses carrable rather than quadrable.

    diff, v7, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)