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 beauty bundle bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched etcs fibration 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 lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic manifolds mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory 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 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.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2009
    • (edited Oct 31st 2009)

    I started reworking a quasi-periodic study of mine on propositions as types that introduces the factors of "proof hints" and "untyped terms" into the analogy.

    Update (\forall~\mathfrak{Hallows'}~\mathfrak{Eve}^\mathfrak{2}, \mathfrak{2009}). This material is now at propositions as types in combinatory algebra.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 28th 2009

    By popular request, I've changed the name to propositions as types done right.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 30th 2009
    • (edited Oct 30th 2009)

    I have followed Toby's suggestion and put my excursus (foiled again) at propositions as types in combinatory algebra. I put Toby's intro at propositions as types in type theory as the software kept sending propositions as types to the original article even after I deleted the redirects. I don't know how folks here like to handle disambiguation pages. I sort of liked Toby's use of "in {your sub*subject here}" instead of parenthetical subcategorizers, so long as it works grammatically.

    I left the redirect from propositions as types done right in order to preserve several links from the cafe and forum.

    By the way, how do you put invisible comments in an article here?

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 30th 2009

    I just noticed that propositions as types goes to Toby's edition of the article while propositions as types done right still goes to my old version.

    Is this a glitch? — or just something that feathers through after a few propagation cycles?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorAndrew Stacey
    • CommentTimeOct 30th 2009

    If the links don't update correctly, that could indicate that a cached page needs clearing. If you list which pages have incorrect links, we can delete the cached copies of those and see if that fixes things.

    You can't put invisible comments in an article on the n-lab - or at least you shouldn't be able to. That's a wide-open door for spammers.

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorJonAwbrey
    • CommentTimeOct 30th 2009

    So far I've noticed only the above two links.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 30th 2009

    It's the redirect cache bug again. I cleared the caches.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 3rd 2011

    added to propositions as types the following (check, needs syntax polishing, but have to run now)

    Moreover, in homotopy type theory where types may be thought of as ∞-groupoids (or rather ∞-stacks, more generally), we may think for AA any type of

    • the objects of AA are proofs of some proposition;

    • the morphisms of AA are equivalences between these proofs;

    • the 2-morphisms of AA are equivalences between these equivalences, and so on.

    So in terms of the notion of n-connected and n-truncated objects in an (∞,1)-category we have

    • if AA is (-1)-connected then the corresponding proposition has a proof and hence is true;

    • if AA is (-2)-truncated then the corresponding proposition is true by a unique proof which is uniquely equivalent to itself, etc.;

    • if AA is 0-truncated then there may be more than one proof, but none equivalent to itself in an interesting way;

    • if AA is 1-truncated then there may be proofs of the corresponding proposition that are equivalent to themselves in interesting ways.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2011

    Homotopy type theory doesn’t really have propositions as types; the (1)(-1)-truncated types may be distinguished as the propositions per se (much as the subsingletons in set theory or the subterminal objects in topos theory). In contrast, no such distinction is made in Martin–Löf type theory (which has less structure than HoTT), which is why Martin–Löf has PaT.

    However, this page is our page on the Curry–Howard correspondence, so your remarks are not out of place. I’ve just rearranged things a bit.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2011

    Okay, thanks.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2011

    It’s a shame that the phrase “propositions as types” is generally taken to include the converse “types as propositions”. The naive English interpretation of “propositions as types” for me would be that propositions are types, but not necessarily that all types are propositions. I added some remarks about “propositions as some types” – it would be good to add a reference to Awodey-Bauer “Propositions as [types]”.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeNov 4th 2011
    • (edited Nov 4th 2011)

    That’s a good point, Mike. Maybe that’s how the phrase should really be read. I take it to mean the identification of propositions with generic examples of the more general concept (types, sets, spaces, whatever), since I see it as obvious that propositions can be identified with specific examples (subsingletons), at least where equality is available. But in logic (rather than in mathematics), this is not obvious, and not even true if one has more logical operators than type constructors.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 12th 2014

    Have added some historical info at propositions as types – References – History that was thrown around on the HoTT mailing list

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2014

    Edited and polished a tad more at propositions as types. Added a pointer to section 1.11 in the HoTT book. But the entry could still be improved a good bit, I suppose.

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)