Timeline for Can we write Tangled Type Theory without reference to type sequences?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 27, 2022 at 21:02 | vote | accept | Zuhair Al-Johar | ||
| Jul 27, 2022 at 13:18 | history | became hot network question | |||
| S Jul 27, 2022 at 12:31 | vote | accept | Zuhair Al-Johar | ||
| Jul 27, 2022 at 21:02 | |||||
| Jul 27, 2022 at 12:31 | vote | accept | Zuhair Al-Johar | ||
| S Jul 27, 2022 at 12:31 | |||||
| Jul 27, 2022 at 10:34 | answer | added | Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 27, 2022 at 7:51 | comment | added | Zuhair Al-Johar | @LSpice, the stipulation of the original theory per sequences is that the asserted sentence is an AXIOM, so the individual axioms are actually typed axioms (wihout sequences), which I think are those of this theory, but I might be mistaken of course. | |
| Jul 26, 2022 at 23:16 | answer | added | Randall Holmes | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jul 26, 2022 at 22:37 | comment | added | LSpice | You surely don't mean to ask whether your theory has the same axioms as another theory, when you have written it with different axioms. Theorems, maybe? | |
| Jul 26, 2022 at 22:37 | history | edited | LSpice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Titles of references; PDF -> abs
|
| Jul 26, 2022 at 21:31 | history | edited | Zuhair Al-Johar | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 59 characters in body
|
| Jul 26, 2022 at 20:58 | history | asked | Zuhair Al-Johar | CC BY-SA 4.0 |