Timeline for Analysis from a categorical perspective
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7, 2021 at 19:10 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | FYI @TomLeinster and Paul: some separate exchanges with Steven Gubkin motivated me to open a chatroom chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/info/118125/… which may or may not be a place for further discussions. I tend to think that no one apart from me cares about this intersection and then from time to time old MO questions/answers seem to get rediscovered and generate new conversations | |
| Jan 7, 2021 at 4:00 | comment | added | Paul Siegel | @TomLeinster I think my mind might be warped too, because this perspective has grown on me since I wrote this answer. It also got me interested in your work on the categorical foundations of entropy, something that I think about a lot these days. Sorry for the slander - I look forward to checking out your preprint soon! | |
| Jan 6, 2021 at 16:52 | comment | added | Tom Leinster | Seriously, no one (including me) is claiming that the universal property of $L^1$ is 'the "right" way to think about integrals'. We all agree that (1) antidifferentiation, and (2) area under the curve, are of fundamental importance. But isn't it interesting that (3) Lebesgue integrability and integration are uniquely characterized by a universal property with no conceptual dependence on either (1) or (2)? | |
| Jan 6, 2021 at 16:49 | history | edited | Tom Leinster | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Updated link
|
| Jan 6, 2021 at 16:48 | comment | added | Tom Leinster | I'm amused to discover ten years later that I have a "warped mind". The result is written up properly, along with various stronger and related results, here: arxiv.org/abs/2011.00412 And Alp's link is the correct one for a shorter version. I've updated it in the answer. | |
| May 29, 2016 at 19:18 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | @Qfwfq: that makes more sense. | |
| May 29, 2016 at 15:17 | comment | added | Qfwfq | @NikWeaver: yeah, you're right, I meant relative to other branches of analysis :) | |
| May 28, 2016 at 14:10 | comment | added | Nik Weaver | @Qfwfq: I don't think many functional analysts would agree that there is "so much category theory in functional analysis". | |
| May 28, 2016 at 13:44 | comment | added | Qfwfq | Maybe there is so much category theory in functional analysis because the latter is essentially topological algebra (over $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$)... | |
| S May 28, 2016 at 8:02 | history | edited | Piero D'Ancona | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed minor tex
|
| S May 28, 2016 at 8:02 | history | suggested | Arrow | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed minor tex
|
| May 28, 2016 at 7:26 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 28, 2016 at 8:02 | |||||
| Jun 9, 2015 at 18:46 | comment | added | Alp Uzman | @Paul Siegel Indeed the link is broken. I believe this is the new address: maths.ed.ac.uk/~tl/glasgowpssl/banach.pdf. Can anyone confirm this? | |
| May 17, 2015 at 22:00 | comment | added | bananastack | uhm, the original link at the top seems now broken, does anyone have a working one? | |
| Sep 15, 2010 at 13:03 | vote | accept | Daniel Miller | ||
| Sep 15, 2010 at 4:39 | history | edited | Paul Siegel | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2010 at 4:34 | history | answered | Paul Siegel | CC BY-SA 2.5 |