2025/02/24

Newest at the top

2025-02-24 23:04:58 +0100 <ncf> https://coq.inria.fr/doc/v8.15/refman/language/cic.html#the-calculus-of-inductive-constructions-wi…
2025-02-24 23:04:56 +0100alfiee(~alfiee@user/alfiee) alfiee
2025-02-24 23:04:36 +0100 <ncf> its other one :)
2025-02-24 23:04:26 +0100 <tomsmeding> isn't that Prop?
2025-02-24 23:04:12 +0100 <ncf> i called it Set at first because that's how Coq calls its impredicative universe iirc
2025-02-24 23:04:04 +0100 <EvanR> Set = U
2025-02-24 23:03:40 +0100 <ncf> well both Set and U are what i'm calling the first universe
2025-02-24 23:03:37 +0100 <EvanR> originally i thought Set was a category
2025-02-24 23:03:06 +0100 <EvanR> ok your last explanation made sense, the U vs U+ thing, with the capital pi, so what does "Set is impredicative / predicative" have to do with that
2025-02-24 23:02:08 +0100 <ncf> in haskell this lives in U (as does every type) so haskell has an impredicative universe in this sense (in fact it has Type : Type which is even stronger (and inconsistent))
2025-02-24 23:01:16 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-02-24 23:00:53 +0100 <ncf> that type would be written Π (A : U) Maybe A in type theory, and the question is whether this is an element of U or U⁺, where U⁺ is the successor universe of U
2025-02-24 23:00:23 +0100 <EvanR> I retract the question then
2025-02-24 23:00:16 +0100 <EvanR> ok
2025-02-24 23:00:10 +0100 <ncf> impredicativity can be understood syntactically
2025-02-24 22:59:43 +0100 <EvanR> but what are the semantics
2025-02-24 22:59:28 +0100 <EvanR> forall a . Maybe a is syntactically a type, in haskell
2025-02-24 22:59:10 +0100Wygulmage(~Wygulmage@user/Wygulmage) (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2025-02-24 22:59:10 +0100 <ncf> yeah there's no size issues there
2025-02-24 22:58:49 +0100 <EvanR> it's not quantifying at all right so that's not applicable
2025-02-24 22:58:33 +0100 <EvanR> Int is a type, Maybe Int is a type
2025-02-24 22:58:14 +0100 <ncf> yes, universes of types are the things that can be impredicative or not
2025-02-24 22:57:59 +0100 <EvanR> is that right
2025-02-24 22:57:54 +0100 <EvanR> so you're talking about universes of types
2025-02-24 22:57:46 +0100 <EvanR> but the word Sets earlier was plural
2025-02-24 22:57:20 +0100 <EvanR> not stuff like 1, 3, 4, 7
2025-02-24 22:57:06 +0100 <ncf> that's a type
2025-02-24 22:57:06 +0100 <EvanR> but going back, you're saying the elements are actually stuff like Int
2025-02-24 22:56:44 +0100target_i(~target_i@user/target-i/x-6023099) (Quit: leaving)
2025-02-24 22:56:43 +0100 <EvanR> a family of types ?
2025-02-24 22:56:12 +0100 <EvanR> I don't know how to comprehend forall a . Maybe a
2025-02-24 22:55:53 +0100 <tomsmeding> Int is a set. Maybe Int is a set. Is `forall a. Maybe a` a set?
2025-02-24 22:55:46 +0100 <EvanR> and the element is doing quantification somehow
2025-02-24 22:55:45 +0100 <ncf> the elements/terms/inhabitants of a universe are types
2025-02-24 22:55:39 +0100 <EvanR> So you have some sets, and now we're talking about elements
2025-02-24 22:55:20 +0100 <EvanR> "Sets can contain elements that quantify ..."
2025-02-24 22:55:13 +0100 <tomsmeding> EvanR: the "quantify" is essential there
2025-02-24 22:55:01 +0100 <ncf> Set is just a universe here
2025-02-24 22:54:53 +0100 <ncf> huh
2025-02-24 22:54:26 +0100 <EvanR> like in set theory?
2025-02-24 22:54:20 +0100 <EvanR> the elements of sets are sets?
2025-02-24 22:54:19 +0100 <ncf> https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3209108.3209130 section 2 has a definition
2025-02-24 22:52:09 +0100ash3en(~Thunderbi@2a03:7846:b6eb:101:93ac:a90a:da67:f207) ash3en
2025-02-24 22:51:15 +0100 <tomsmeding> Types of the form "forall A : Set..." are sets. Sets can contain elements that quantify over the universe of sets.
2025-02-24 22:50:26 +0100merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-02-24 22:50:21 +0100Ekho(~Ekho@user/ekho) (Quit: CORE ERROR, SYSTEM HALTED.)
2025-02-24 22:49:41 +0100 <EvanR> ok unnegate it please
2025-02-24 22:48:48 +0100wootehfoot(~wootehfoo@user/wootehfoot) (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2025-02-24 22:47:36 +0100 <lyxia> oh haha
2025-02-24 22:47:22 +0100 <ncf> well it means the negation of that