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.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 25th 2023

    I have touched wording, typesetting and hyperlinking of this entry, in an attempt to polish it up a little.

    diff, v11, current

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 25th 2023
    • (edited Jan 25th 2023)

    Where the entry had a parenthetical hint that the elimination rule for the empty type seen in dependent type theory is different than previously stated, I have now added in the full dependent type inference rules: here (typeset such as to match the general pattern of the list of Examples here at inductive type).

    Where the entry next said that

    However, there is an eta-conversion rule,

    I have changed that two

    However, one may consider an eta-conversion rule,

    because neither Coq considers this rule (as the article already mentioned) nor do the references which i have now added.

    In contrast, it would be good good to add some reference where that eta-rule for the empty type is in fact considered (I don’t know any, but that does not mean much).

    diff, v11, current

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 25th 2023

    Thinking about it, the fact that empty-recursion is still a special case of empty-induction is intuitively surprising. I understand how it readily comes about from blindly applying the same syntactic manipulations just as for any inductive type, but reading these out in words here in the case of the empty type yields a strange story, where one has to think about promoting any inhabited type to a constant family over the empty type, which, at face value, is an absurdity. I gather this works out because one really does so conditioned on the absurd assumption that there is a term in the empty type in the first place. But without the syntactic manipulations as a guide, it would be hard to see through what is going on here.

    Maybe I’ll add a comment on this to the entry, tomorrow when I am more awake than now.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 26th 2023
    • (edited Jan 26th 2023)

    more ado about nothing:

    have subdivided the sub-section “As a positive type” into three sub-sub-sections:

    Recursion principle here: This contains essentially the old material before my edits above, expanded by commentary on interoretation of the empty elimination rule in proposition logic and in categorical semantics

    Recursion principle here: This contains the full (dependent) inductive inference rule as above, appended – for emphasis – by amplification that this still does imply the previous recursion principle

    Eta conversion here: This is paragraph on eta-converion by previous contributors, essentially unchanged. But this still deserves a citation.

    diff, v13, current

  1. Added a section regarding the definition of the empty type which uses the type of propositions.

    diff, v16, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorVít Jelínek
    • CommentTimeApr 29th 2024
    The part about the empty type as a univalent universe seems quite confusing to me. My confusion comes from reading about the unit type in the same paragraph. I am not sure what was the original intention, but it might be worth either correcting (if there is a mistake), or explaining where the unit type comes from.
    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2024

    Yes, I agree; it doesn’t make much sense. The anonymous editor who added that didn’t see fit to say anything about it here, so I don’t know why they thought it was worthwhile, but I think it is confusing and unhelpful. If whoever added it is reading this, feel free to explain what you had in mind; otherwise I think we should remove it.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeApr 30th 2024

    Remove “the empty type as a univalent universe”

    diff, v18, current