3 ms·
Heh. Warming up to writing a “I wish people would not use the adjective ‘categorical’ in a maths context because it implies Category Theory”. Reads abstract...”
by ajarmst 6y ago
Heh. Warming up to writing a “I wish people would not use the adjective ‘categorical’ in a maths context because it implies Category Theory”. Reads abstract...”Oh, it is Category Theory. Wow, that’s a cool application.” <Starts Reading>
- AnthonBerg 6y agoI am same morphism on same object
- whatshisface 6y agoCounterpoint: How many words are left that aren't overloaded in a mathematical context?
- penteract 6y agoAssuming that by "word" you mean a finite string over a non-empty alphabet, then there are infinitely many - only a finite subset of them have mathematical definitions :) .
- whatshisface 6y agoWould not every word also denote a regular expression, thereby having a mathematical definition?
- marcosdumay 6y agoCS is full of proofs that use all possible words or word sequence. The real test is if somebody actually wrote it in an undecipherable wikipedia page.
- omaranto 6y agoFirst of all categorical in a math context does not always refer to category theory. In logic a theory is called categorical in K if it has only one model of cardinality K up to isomorphism. Second, is this really a common problem? People using the word categorical in a math context without mean either category-theoretical or the meaning in logic? Do you have an example?