From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/4608 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Baez Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories Subject: Bourbaki and Categories Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 03:00:32 -0700 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241020055 14028 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2009 15:47:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:47:35 +0000 (UTC) To: categories Original-X-From: rrosebru@mta.ca Fri Sep 19 13:29:50 2008 -0300 Return-path: Envelope-to: categories-list@mta.ca Delivery-date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:29:50 -0300 Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1KgijZ-0003tq-K4 for categories-list@mta.ca; Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:21:29 -0300 Content-Disposition: inline Original-Sender: cat-dist@mta.ca Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 78 Original-Lines: 23 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:4608 Archived-At: On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 01:13:21PM -0400, Andre Joyal wrote: > Is it the time for a new Bourbaki? Do we imagine this new Bourbaki as just systematizing and presenting what we know already, or struggling to create brand new mathematics? I can imagine a new Bourbaki who tries to explain all of mathematics in the language of categories. But I can also imagine a new Bourbaki who tries to explain all of mathematics in the language of infinity-categories. It may be a bit too late for the first one, and a bit too early for the second one. Perhaps we need both! Best, jb