|
question on formalism B: msg#00007science.mathematics.frogs
Hi Frogs, I have a question, addressed in particular to those working on "Formalism B", which is still somehow a mystery to me. I have some good understanding of what should be identified, but not of what SHOULD NOT be identified. Can someone give me a simple example of two derivations that are not identified by "Formalism B", but are identified by proof nets (the N-nets of our TLCA-paper) ? I guess that ([A,B],[C,D]) s --------------- [A,(B,[C,D])] s --------------- [A,[(B,C),D]] vs. ([A,B],[C,D]) s --------------- [([A,B],C),D] s --------------- [[A,(B,C)],D] = --------------- [A,[(B,C),D]] should be the typical example. The two derivations above are identified by proof nets. But not by B, are they? Am I right or wrong about this? In any case, an answer would also help clarifying the relation to categorical coherence. Maybe we should introduce a third type of bureaucracy: Type C. "Formalism C" then identifies the two derivations above. The theorem would be "Formalism C" = proof nets = cat. coherence Does this make sense? -Lutz |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | some news on predicate logic: 00007, Kai Brünnler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Bureaucracy and identity: 00007, Alessio Guglielmi |
| Previous by Thread: | some news on predicate logici: 00007, Kai Brünnler |
| Next by Thread: | Re:question on formalism B: 00007, Alessio Guglielmi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |