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 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 nforum 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.
    • CommentAuthormaxsnew
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2022

    A simple characterization I just came across in some synthetic domain theory.

    diff, v6, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMay 11th 2023

    I just came across

    So let’s add a reference, if not the argument itself.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorzskoda
    • CommentTimeMay 16th 2023

    2.7. uses word “neighther”. Is this a legitimate English word/spelling ?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMay 16th 2023

    fixed spelling

    diff, v9, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthormartinescardo
    • CommentTimeMay 16th 2023
    • (edited May 16th 2023)
    Proposition 2.1 doesn't make sense. You can't form the double exponential over the Sierpinski space unless the space X is exponentiable, and most (T0) spaces are not exponentiable (e.g. the Baire space (product of countably many copies of the discrete space of natural numbers) is a T0 non-exponentiable space).
    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeMay 16th 2023

    Just for the record: The statement of Prop. 2.1 was added in revision 6.

    This is occasion to re-iterate #2: Not to add bare statements without an indication of their justification and/or a reference.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeMay 18th 2023

    Martin, I wonder if sense can be made of Proposition 2.1 if we consider the continuation monad unit as living in a cartesian closed category containing TopTop as a full subcategory, such as the category of pseudotopological spaces? There is a kind of intuitive sense lurking there, that T 0T_0-ness means “open sets separate points”, and this is what 2.1 is groping to express.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeMay 19th 2023
    • (edited May 23rd 2023)

    Rather than make a meal of the suggestion of my previous comment, I replaced the wrong sentence with something that is correct: that T 0T_0-ness is equivalent to having the unit component of the standard adjunction between Frame opFrame^{op} and TopTop be a monomorphism.

    diff, v10, current

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorGuest
    • CommentTimeMay 23rd 2023

    added section on Kolmogorov topological spaces in dependent type theory

    diff, v13, current

  1. Same as the case for specialization order there is material duplicated from topological space in the dependent type theory section in this article.

    Also, the definition given here about dependent type theory is really about correctly defining partial orders in dependent type theory rather than Kolmogorov topological space so I moved the technical details over to partial order and simply defined

    A Kolmogorov topological space or T 0T_0-space is a topological space which is a partial order with respect to the specialization order of the topological space.

    But then the above definition isn’t really specific to dependent type theory, so I ended up getting rid of the dependent type theory section completely and moved the definition into the alternate characterizations section as a proposition:


    diff, v17, current