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 bundles calculus categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology definitions deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry differential-topology digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory history homological homological-algebra homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory infinity integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal-logic model model-category-theory monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology multicategories newpage noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pasting philosophy physics planar 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-theory subobject 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.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2012

    I separated Cauchy filter from Cauchy space.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2012

    Now with nonstandard analysis.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2012

    I’ve never encountered the word “adequality” before, and I thought I’d read a fair amount of NSA. I’m looking forward to seeing the page created…

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2012
    • (edited Oct 16th 2012)

    I could have sworn that we already had it, which is initially why I linked to it. Since the internal search no longer works, I can't easily check whether the string adequal appears anywhere in the Lab, but Google has neither word ‘adequal’ nor ‘adequality’ indexed, and I can't imagine how else that string would appear.

    There is a Wikipedia page, but that's a historical treatment focussing on Fermat (who invented the term), not really what I remember seeing before. Google is no help. But I know that I was reading about this (in the context of NSA) somewhere.

    Anyway, it simply means that two points are infinitely close together. For example, in a metric space, xyx \approx y iff d(x,y)d(x,y) is infinitesimal. If xx is standard, then xyx \approx y iff yy belongs to the monad of xx, which makes sense in any topological space (and in fact defines the topology); the relation between arbitrary hyperpoints makes sense in any uniform space (and in fact defines the uniformity). When both xx and yy are standard, then adequality reduces to the specialisation order (or its symmetrisation; I'm not sure how the term should be used in non-symmetric spaces).

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2012

    Do you pronounce ’adequal’ as “ad+equal”, with approximately equal emphasis on the first and second syllables? (Up until now, it never occurred to me that there was an etymological connection between ’adequate’ and ’equate’, but a quick check in one of my dictionaries seems to indicate that.)

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2012

    I did so pronounce it, but now that you mention ‘adequate’, maybe I won't. I've only seen it written.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeOct 17th 2012

    Got it, thanks! I’m familiar with the concept, but I don’t think I’ve heard a name for it before, aside from “infinite closeness”.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 19th 2012

    Re #5, the Latin ancestor of adequate appears in Aquinas’s

    Veritas est adaequatio intellectus et rei.

    There’s a lot packed into that ’adequation’ of mind and thing.

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorTobyBartels
    • CommentTimeOct 19th 2012

    Truth is the adequation of mind and thing, is that what it says?

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeOct 21st 2012

    That’s right.

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)