sigmoid.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A social space for people researching, working with, or just interested in AI!

Server stats:

612
active users

#maths

48 posts26 participants2 posts today

my brain isn't working

did I get the type on the last line right?

---

if x was x:β then the type would be β→...

but here x is x:Πα:*.(α→α) and naively that means the type is Πα:*.(α→α) →...

I'm partly worried that α should be σ but then I remember that α is bound so irrelevant outside the scope of the Π

I'm begrudgingly impressed by overleaf - an online latex editor and previewer.

They managed to include useful latex packages, have good documentation and tutorials, have a UI that isn't too complicated and headache-inducing.

I still use offline lyx for my projects, but overleaf is good for generating small snippets of typeset maths.

Begrudging? Well, I wanted to create an online version of lyx (no latex code) but never managed to find time.

overleaf.com/

www.overleaf.comOverleaf, Online LaTeX EditorAn online LaTeX editor that’s easy to use. No installation, real-time collaboration, version control, hundreds of LaTeX templates, and more.

"Mon enthousiasme pour les mathématiques avait peut-être eu pour base principale mon horreur pour l'hypocrisie [...]. Suivant moi, l'hypocrisie était impossible en mathématiques et, dans ma simplicité juvénile, je pensais qu'il en était ainsi dans toutes les sciences où j'avais ouï dire qu'elles s'appliquaient." – Stendhal (1783-1842)
#citation #mathématiques #maths #math

Continued thread

Why am I asking?

previously I worked out the type of

λxyz. xz(yz)

as

(B → (A → C)) → (B → A) → B → C

where x:A, y:B, z:C

---

now I want to parameterise the types of x,y,z to make a λ2-term and it seems easier if I can do the funny types

λα,β,γ:*. λx:(β → (α→γ)) . λy:(β→α) . λz:β. xz(yz) : Παβγ:*.(β → (α→γ)) → (β→α) → β → γ

If I wasn't allowed to have non-trivial types for x, y, z then the "algebra" on the RHS would be really convoluted

---

2/2

Is it normal to do this kind of thing?

λα,β:* . x:α→β, y: α . xy : Πα,β:*. (α→β) →α →β

That is, to have non-trivial types for objects like x?

--

To make that clearer ...

So instead of just doing x:α, y:β we do things like x:α→β→β and y:β→α

---

1/2

Do you guys know what saddens me the most at the moment?

The fact that we keep multiplying sin and cos function parameters by π or 𝜏 for the function to immediately undo this and move it back into normalized range.

Sometimes (often) I have this mathematical urge, this instinct, to just name everything with one letter, then I switch to capitalized ones when I run out of them, and then I feel frustrated for not being able to use some Unicode character instead of pi, tau, phi, ...

This is honestly starting to frighten me, especially since I'm actually taking a liking to it.

This is a sickness, please help me.

Replied in thread

@jonmsterling

Thanks

---

I previously struggled to find a T such that

Πα:*.α : T

which appears to ask for a 'type of a type'

with some help, I used the formation rule to say T must be *

---

The reason I'm struggling a little with this kind of expression again is I have a more challenging (to me) exercise where I have to find an inhabitant for α and β given the context

α : ∗
β : ∗
x : α →Πα:*.α
f : (α →α) →α

looking at x is why I'm thinking " what is the type of Πα:*.α ?"

"In mathematics it is new ways of looking at old things which seem to be the most prolific sources of far-reaching discoveries. A particular fact may have been known for centuries, and it may have been sterile or of only minor interest all that time, when suddenly some original mind glimpses it from a new angle and perceives the gateway to an empire." – Eric Temple Bell (1883-1960)
#quote #mathematics #math #maths