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 finite 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 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 sheaves simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory stack string string-theory 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.
    • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
    • CommentTimeJul 29th 2022
    • (edited Aug 13th 2022)

    I often use this definition in other pages. It is referred to as additive categories in papers on differential categories but it is confusing.

    v1, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
    • CommentTimeAug 13th 2022
    • (edited Aug 13th 2022)

    Added a bunch of links. Actually hyperlinking more words would involve creating entries such as “two” or “every”.

    diff, v2, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 13th 2022

    hyperlinking more words would involve creating entries such as “two” or “every”.

    :-)

    That’s the right attitude! And why not link every to universal quantification.

    By the way, your comment above on why you create this entry in parallel to “additive category”: That kind of comment would be good to include in the Idea-section of the entry!

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorJ-B Vienney
    • CommentTimeAug 13th 2022
    • (edited Aug 13th 2022)

    Added the comment.

    I didn’t dare adding the link to universal quantification ahah.

    We will not be able to be perfect: one must add a link for the word “and”. But how to define it the first time? This impossible task must be related to the way we learn the natural language and probably people weren’t thinking to this at the beginning of the XX thXX^{th} century when they tried to formalize everything in math.

    diff, v4, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 13th 2022

    Sure, we don’t need to be doing that (and we are generally not even close to such fine-grained hyperlinking).

    All I keep trying to urge everyone is to put double square brackets around technical terms. Don’t assume that the reader already knows what you, the author, know – and even if they do, given them a chance to remind themselves or look up details. It’s a tiny extra effort for every author, but brings out the whole point of a wiki so much better.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMorgan Rogers
    • CommentTimeJan 21st 2024

    The sentence “This is typical of the attitude in theoretical computer science where one often doesn’t assume the presence of negative numbers.” reads as very dismissive considering that it is the classical definition of “additive category” which is at fault for the ambiguity (that name doesn’t mention subtraction, after all…)

    I decided to remove that sentence. I also corrected a couple of typos.

    diff, v7, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 21st 2024

    I have touched the wording in the Idea-section, just for streamlining.

    diff, v8, current