|
3 |
edited tags
|
||
|
2 |
Qualified term in title
|
||
The set-theoretic multiverse as a (bi)category |
||||
|
1 |
|
||
The multiverse as a (bi)categoryJoel Hamkin's The set-theoretic multiverse has featured in MO questions before, e.g., here and here. But I was wondering about the best category theoretic angle to take on it. In the paper Joel writes, rather poetically,
He has given us a couple of kinds of morphism here, but what is the best way to capture this multiverse category theoretically? Which morphisms should we allow? Is it right to stay at the level of ordinary categories? Since each universe, a model of ZFC, is a category, one might expect the multiverse to be at least a bicategory, as suggested here. Do set theorists consider, say, arrows between two forcing relations between two models?
|
||||

