Timeline for Confusion over a point in basic category theory
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2011 at 20:23 | comment | added | Qfwfq | Wait a minute, isn't $\mathrm{Cat}$ -the 2-category of small categories- a proper class? ;P | |
| Feb 21, 2010 at 5:31 | comment | added | Simon Rose | So I suppose then that we don't really need "Pet Axiom 1) Your favorite pet is a set." | |
| Feb 21, 2010 at 1:26 | comment | added | Qiaochu Yuan | A universe where {Cat, Dog, Monkey} isn't a set isn't very useful, is it? In all seriousness, you can interpret them as strings, hence as the sets in ZF corresponding to the numbers that make up their ASCII representations. But again, the "implementation details" are totally unimportant. | |
| Feb 21, 2010 at 0:50 | comment | added | Simon Rose | Unless I misunderstand something, {Cat, Dog, Monkey} isn't a set, is it? I suppose it depends on what you mean by the category of all sets, but I'm pretty sure cats don't show up in ZF... | |
| Feb 19, 2010 at 19:08 | history | answered | Qiaochu Yuan | CC BY-SA 2.5 |