From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/5851 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: John Baez Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories Subject: Re: terminology Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 10:08:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: John Baez NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274810108 7735 80.91.229.12 (25 May 2010 17:55:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 17:55:08 +0000 (UTC) To: categories@mta.ca Original-X-From: categories@mta.ca Tue May 25 19:55:07 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gsmc-categories@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mailserv.mta.ca ([138.73.1.1]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGyLL-0002bm-Dw for gsmc-categories@m.gmane.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 19:55:07 +0200 Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1OGy8P-00046C-V0 for categories-list@mta.ca; Tue, 25 May 2010 14:41:46 -0300 In-Reply-To: Original-Sender: categories@mta.ca Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:5851 Archived-At: Colin wrote: It is an interesting impulse in higher category theory to avoid identity in > favor of isomorphism on the level of objects, and to avoid isomorphism in > favor of equivalence on the level of categories. But > so far as I know no one has yet articulated a way to avoid ever using > identity of objects and identity of categories. > I think Michael Makkai has done it. He has formulated a foundational approach to mathematics based on infinity-categories, in which equality plays no fundamental role: http://www.math.mcgill.ca/makkai/mltomcat04/mltomcat04.pdf I think some approach along these general lines might ultimately become quite popular. However, to think in an easy intuitive way about a mathematical world without equality, we need new definitions of words such as "the" and "is". Those who find it unpleasant to change the definition of words such as "autonomous" may think it absurd to consider a such a radical shift in basic terminology. However, we can already see these words changing their meanings as we pass from reasoning within sets - where we say "the" product 2 x 3 "is" 6 - to reasoning within categories - where we say "the" product of "the" 2-element set and "the" 3-element set "is" "the" 6-element set. For a readable introduction to some of Makkai's ideas, try: http://www.math.mcgill.ca/makkai/equivalence/equivinpdf/equivalence.pdf Best,. jb [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]