categories - Category Theory list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Shulman <shulman@math.uchicago.edu>
To: Toby Bartels <toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Cc: categories@mta.ca,
	Thomas Streicher <streicher@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Subject: Re: Is equality evil?
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 09:18:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1OzcjA-0000We-Vq@mlist.mta.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1Oz7GE-0001gy-TD@mlist.mta.ca>

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Toby Bartels
<toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> In sufficiently impredicative mathematics, identity can be defined:
>  Given a type A and elements x and y of A, x is _identical_ to y
>  if, for every predicate p on A, p holds for x iff p holds for y.
> ...
> It would be interesting to hear from people who want to keep kosher,
> but also want to reason impredicatively, how to interpret this definition.

Well, if "for every predicate" is to be interpreted as ranging only
over kosher predicates, then x and y are Leibniz identical as soon as
they are isomorphic (or equivalent, or whatever is appropriate).  Note
that in order for the notion of "keeping kosher" to even be
meaningful, you need the type A to "come with" some sort of notion of
equivalence between its elements; assigning it after the fact isn't
good enough.  But if A does have such a notion, then it seems that
Leibniz identity is provably equivalent to "there exists an
equivalence between x and y," by applying the definition of Leibniz
identity to the property p(z) = "there exists an equivalence between x
and z".

> As to Leibniz equality. If x and y are Leibniz equal, i.e.  \forall
> P : A -> Prop. P(x) -> P(y), then this doesn't allow one to
> construct a map B(x) -> B(y) in case B : A -> Set (simply because
> Set is not Prop).

Of course, this makes sense from the perspective above, since there's
no reason to expect that simply knowing that there *exists* an
equivalence between x and y would determine a map B(x) -> B(y); you
need to first pick a particular such equivalence.  I find this to be a
good reason for (intensional) identity types, whose elimination rule
provides a map (indeed, an equivalence) B(x) -> B(y) for any
inhabitant of Id(x,y).  In fact, the inductive notion of identity
types, as used in Voevodsky's foundations:

Inductive paths (T:Type)(t:T): T -> Type := idpath: paths T t t.

seems to me to essentially define it by strengthening Leibniz identity
to allow elimination into Set/Type as well.

Mike


[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]


  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-25 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-15 11:43 are fibrations evil? Thomas Streicher
2010-09-16  0:28 ` Michael Shulman
2010-09-16  1:14 ` Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine
2010-09-16  5:14 ` Is equality evil? Vaughan Pratt
2010-09-17  8:28   ` Toby Bartels
2010-09-18 14:11     ` Thomas Streicher
2010-09-19 20:30       ` Erik Palmgren
2010-09-24 12:50       ` Bas Spitters
     [not found]     ` <20100918141110.GC9467@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>
2010-09-22  4:00       ` Toby Bartels
2010-09-25 16:18         ` Michael Shulman [this message]
     [not found]       ` <20100922040041.GB14958@ugcs.caltech.edu>
2010-09-22 10:27         ` Thomas Streicher
2010-09-16  8:50 ` why it matters that fibrations are "evil" Thomas Streicher
     [not found] ` <AANLkTinosTZ2NQW9biPxiwpX9zPi5m=kwvA16nHjK=Xu@mail.gmail.com>
2010-09-16  9:47   ` are fibrations evil? Thomas Streicher
2010-09-16 10:00 ` Prof. Peter Johnstone
     [not found] ` <alpine.LRH.2.00.1009161023190.12162@siskin.dpmms.cam.ac.uk>
2010-09-16 10:46   ` Thomas Streicher
2010-09-17  7:44     ` Toby Bartels
     [not found] ` <20100916094755.GA19976@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>
2010-09-17  5:01   ` Michael Shulman
2010-09-18 13:48     ` Thomas Streicher
     [not found] ` <20100918134829.GB9467@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>
2010-09-20 16:25   ` Michael Shulman
2010-09-24 15:30 Is equality evil?‏ Mattias Wikström
2010-09-25  0:16 Is equality evil? Fred E.J. Linton

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=E1OzcjA-0000We-Vq@mlist.mta.ca \
    --to=shulman@math.uchicago.edu \
    --cc=categories@mta.ca \
    --cc=streicher@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de \
    --cc=toby+categories@ugcs.caltech.edu \
    /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).