categories - Category Theory list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: gcuri@math.unipd.it
To: categories@mta.ca
Subject: Re: "Kantor dust"
Date: Sun,  8 Feb 2009 12:56:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1LWA3I-0001os-Pn@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)

Quoting "Prof. Peter Johnstone" <P.T.Johnstone@dpmms.cam.ac.uk>:

> > If the latter then that's no
> > surprise---carrying out constructions with open order filters is less
> > constructive than with the Cauchy sequence concept.  Lubarsky and
> > Rathien in Logic and Analysis 1:2 131-152 have recently made the point
> > that whereas Cauchy reals can be understood constructively as a set, any
> > attempt to make Dedekind's reals constructive turns them into a proper
> > class.
> >
> > Between Dedekind cuts and Cauchy sequences, the more appropriate notion
> > of reals for constructive analysis would surely be the Cauchy reals.
>
> I could take issue with you on this. If you insist that "constructive"
> entails "predicative", then you are  of course right; but in a topos-
> theoretic context, where you don't have countable choice automatically
> available, it's very much the other way round.


Even if one insists that constructive entails predicative the appropriateness of
Cauchy reals is questionable: Lubarsky and Rathjen prove in fact that in a 
subsystem of CZF (Aczel' constructive set theory), i.e., in CZF with
Subset Collection replaced by exponentiation, the Dedekind reals  form a proper
class.
In ordinary CZF (that has no choice principle and no powersets),
the Dedekind reals *do* form a set (Aczel & Rathjen), as do more generally the
points of any weakly set-presented T^*_1 locale (Aczel & Curi),
in particular of any locally compact regular one.

It is also useful to recall that (in "On the Cauchy Completeness of the
Constructive Cauchy Reals", MLQ, 53, No. 4-5 (2007), pp. 396-414)
Lubarsky has  proved that the Cauchy Reals are not complete in intuitionistic
set theory without choice.

There's then the point of view that, constructively, the reals should be
considered as a `space', rather than a set, and that in this perspective they
are more properly regarded e.g. as a locale/formal space (rather than as a
set/class of points with a topology)...

Regards,

   Giovanni Curi

-----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Dipartimento di Matematica Pura ed Applicata
Universita' degli Studi di Padova
www.math.unipd.it




             reply	other threads:[~2009-02-08 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-08 11:56 gcuri [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-02-13  5:40 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-12  9:05 Bas Spitters
2009-02-12  9:00 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-12  4:25 Toby Bartels
2009-02-12  4:10 Toby Bartels
2009-02-12  4:05 Toby Bartels
2009-02-11 23:51 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-11 22:16 Bhupinder Singh Anand
2009-02-11 19:56 Greg Meredith
2009-02-11 17:53 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-11 17:33 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-11 16:11 Michael Shulman
2009-02-11 15:55 Toby Kenney
2009-02-11  9:01 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-11  9:01 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-11  5:49 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-11  0:13 Toby Bartels
2009-02-10 22:18 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-10 21:05 Greg Meredith
2009-02-10 19:04 Steve Stevenson
2009-02-10  9:54 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-09 22:47 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-09 22:18 Dusko Pavlovic
2009-02-09  1:30 Toby Bartels
2009-02-09  0:31 Toby Bartels
2009-02-08 20:36 Steve Stevenson
2009-02-08 15:03 Paul Taylor
2009-02-08 14:51 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-07 22:58 Toby Bartels
2009-02-07 17:18 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-07  0:37 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-05 21:44 Toby Bartels
2009-02-04 20:24 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-03 17:59 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-02 23:43 Vaughan Pratt
2009-02-01 18:53 Prof. Peter Johnstone
2009-02-01  0:06 Vaughan Pratt
2009-01-31 10:25 spitters
2009-01-31  4:35 Galchin, Vasili
2009-01-30 22:40 Galchin, Vasili
2009-01-30 21:52 Bas Spitters
2009-01-30  7:18 Galchin, Vasili
2009-01-30  7:18 Galchin, Vasili

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=E1LWA3I-0001os-Pn@mailserv.mta.ca \
    --to=gcuri@math.unipd.it \
    --cc=categories@mta.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).