From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Received: by 2002:a1c:ca04:: with SMTP id a4-v6mr599452wmg.21.1527353276134; Sat, 26 May 2018 09:47:56 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: homotopytypetheory@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:a1c:41d5:: with SMTP id o204-v6ls4664670wma.1.gmail; Sat, 26 May 2018 09:47:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a1c:f50e:: with SMTP id t14-v6mr539085wmh.27.1527353275148; Sat, 26 May 2018 09:47:55 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1527353275; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=EO2VZMP/pgXuwC1twrdUagDN5/+I8z/Vx6lrMNHwB4N0Iwza4FrMqGb4yxEwyIPY2/ MWjK3coRp7MdeG8MnjM4CFMDqS4BWMpDhGhbDVVgK4qfLUijoW0ZaooQkrM2AW7sHAEa Cq5eYE9QrTUlIoBA8h5QD0rbZ8Y5gl3GB3eoYySokovyDug3L0aLZ5CGNVprN04cc8YF OSr1IjsphSg6q4CmkxhZbPRb3DPFt90LjVKf+A2v6OGvM97uNGZ2jZEllKcwvmtRT9Bc aD9U17U82J4xquHGfwLuonEZjGCkCjQKTKFAIqxqVqWQclmguAIhy0iklpf4NEEyJ6+D kH/Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=importance:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:cc:to :from:subject:date:references:in-reply-to:message-id :arc-authentication-results; bh=pYtT1b+BtB23+qB1/3h9nrLxZ2/1ekWaAgS7vddgKfA=; b=Qz76LAQJEL5Ayn9WUJvFIxKMoXbrkuQdcwmxXSndWlbd8azovvMrhq+D2XSxvK3pKf vmq0MT+h+FdFMADjhE+uxczSecFvDbCrlaCgCx89aaXiFjELKQwzU3xvgaGTOJIPU138 P9wghBokweGnstcB6gGqvulTt3ytCr/fK6Mh2KdP1XvAceNnKtm3AjUQ2BhFWZa3FbAG HiMlapr9103pVGGsPI/+twsN/oaPDZUXRzNz144fwU3JRfk9XTRALm8cPHsBd1wjvNDO LEMiwJD4lZO5/HUaDf7+9zHzXoQsGAXCHw1QChWvima5zi94+D79d1wi25bZC9oZFclE 3MoA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de designates 130.83.156.239 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de Return-Path: Received: from lnx503.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de (mail-relay239.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de. [130.83.156.239]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d18-v6si507998wrm.0.2018.05.26.09.47.55 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 26 May 2018 09:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de designates 130.83.156.239 as permitted sender) client-ip=130.83.156.239; Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de designates 130.83.156.239 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de Received: from fb04281.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de (fb04281.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.2.21]) by lnx503.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/HRZ/PMX) with ESMTP id w4QGlKwq015166; Sat, 26 May 2018 18:47:20 +0200 (envelope-from stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de) Received: from webmail.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de (fb04277.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de [130.83.2.17]) by fb04281.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-7.2) with ESMTP id w4QGlpi6024027; Sat, 26 May 2018 18:47:51 +0200 Received: from 87.166.23.12 (SquirrelMail authenticated user streicher) by webmail.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de with HTTP; Sat, 26 May 2018 18:47:51 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20180526092138.GA7067@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de> Date: Sat, 26 May 2018 18:47:51 +0200 Subject: Re: [HoTT] Where is the problem with initiality? From: stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de To: "Michael Shulman" Cc: "Thomas Streicher" , "Ambrus Kaposi" , "Altenkirch Thorsten" , "HomotopyT...@googlegroups.com" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-PMX-TU: seen v1.2 by 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2018.5.26.163917 X-PMX-RELAY: outgoing > Thomas, are you saying that the hard part is proving that the syntax > of type theory is a CwF? I always thought that was perfectly obvious > and the hard part was interpreting the syntax into some other CwF. That was a misunderstanding on my side. Correctness is also quite an issue. But I thought you just discussed the initiality problem! For this the laborious part is indeed showing that Lindenbaum-Tarski gives a model. I mean this is intuitively clear and without any surprises. If one is not overly formalist one is happy to believe this. I possibly was more formalist those days (:- But formulating the correctness in terms of a partial interpretation function on raw syntax is a nice unorthodox idea. To perform it is also a bit dull but getting the idea how to proceed took me some time. If I had thought in terms of initial models for essentially algebraic theories I wouldn't have proven my completeness theorem but rather relied on algebraic and variable syntax as obviously “isomorph“. Thomas