Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 definitions 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 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexCreated [[looping combinator]].

   Created looping combinator.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexIn order to get rid of the grey link in view of all the material we have on coinduction, I made _[[coinductive definition]]_ a stub that redirects to _[[definition]]_ and _[[coinduction]]_.

   In order to get rid of the grey link in view of all the material we have on coinduction, I made coinductive definition a stub that redirects to definition and coinduction.

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI intentionally did not do that, because our page [[coinduction]] is about *proof* by coinduction.

   I intentionally did not do that, because our page coinduction is about proof by coinduction.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI see that you created [[inductive definition]] to go along with it. I would suggest that instead, [[inductive definition]] should redirect to [[inductive type]] and similarly for [[coinductive definition]] (although [[coinductive type]] remains to be written).

   I see that you created inductive definition to go along with it. I would suggest that instead, inductive definition should redirect to inductive type and similarly for coinductive definition (although coinductive type remains to be written).

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • (edited Sep 20th 2012)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexOkay, I made _[[inductive definition]]_ point to _[[inducive type]]_ for the precise definition. I hope you don't mean that there is harm done by the entry _[[coinductive definition]]_. It needs to be fleshed out, but the single sentence currently there is still better than a broken link, I'd think.

   Okay, I made inductive definition point to inducive type for the precise definition.

   I hope you don’t mean that there is harm done by the entry coinductive definition. It needs to be fleshed out, but the single sentence currently there is still better than a broken link, I’d think.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeSep 20th 2012
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexWell, I think the statement "a coinductive definition is a definition by coinduction" is not correct, or at least misleading, given that our page [[coinduction]] uses the word to refer only to *proofs* about a structure that has already been coinductively defined. But I'm not asking you to fix it; maybe I'll get around to writing [[coinductive type]] one of these days.

   Well, I think the statement “a coinductive definition is a definition by coinduction” is not correct, or at least misleading, given that our page coinduction uses the word to refer only to proofs about a structure that has already been coinductively defined. But I’m not asking you to fix it; maybe I’ll get around to writing coinductive type one of these days.