type theory

By Xah Lee. Date: . Last updated: .

Reading Egbert Rijke Homotopy Type Theory Book vs Wikipedia

so much reading on type theory in past days.

The book Intro to Homotopy Type Theory by Egbert Rijke. I kinda abandoned reading it sequentially. It's not so good. I always go back to encyclopedia style materials instead. The text books, they usually try to teach by sequential manner, with each step detailed. But often, you end up stuck in one place on this linear road. Due to, i think often the author fails to be exacting in formal approach. (hard to do, cuz often you have to mention some concept before they are defined, and you also waddle in english, some parts have technical meaning to the topic, other parts are just english description of the topic, and sometimes you cannot tell which is which.)

Wikipedia and other online articles, allow you to freely jump, amass multiple views to get the concepts, even though each article may not be as professional or fully correct.

here's some random comments on the Wikipedia article Type theory first they described several types. e.g. empty type, unit type, boolean type, product type, sum type, natural numbers type.

but note, seems, some are a single type, while others are a class of types (many instances of such types). thus, they are meta descriptions of a set of types.

For empty type, unit type, boolean type, there seems to be just one type of each. But for product type, there are many such types. Same for sum type. But for the natural numbers type, again, just one such type.

In a sense, the product type is actually a class of types, or type of types. Thus, a meta description of types.

in other words, in a given formal type system, do you actually have a type, called “product type”, or is the phrase “product type” a description of a class of types in the type system? (i presume the latter.) If so, that means, there is no such thing as “product type”. The concept of “product type”, is just meta description for human to learn the type system. It does not exist. Is that right?

logic = tail chasing

this captures the evolution of logic / math foundation in past one hundred years. and that spiral, may not end.

logic tail chasing 2024 nbrcR
logic tail chasing 2024 nbrcR
type theory 2024-01-10 BdpfW
type theory 2024-01-10 BdpfW

lots reading on type theory in past days.

Lambda Calculus 2013 By Henk Barendregt

Henk Barendregt home page https://www.cs.ru.nl/~henk/

lambda calculus 2024-01
lambda calculus 2024-01 [Lambda Calculus By Henk Barendregt. At http://www.cs.ru.nl/~henk/Reflection/HL5.pdf ] (local copy HL5_tnzt.pdf)

Type Theory, Extensional vs Intensional

type theory 2024-01-26 021114
type theory 2024-01-26 021114
type theory 2024-01-26 021712
type theory 2024-01-26 021712
type theory 2024-01-26 022432
type theory 2024-01-26 022432
type theory 2024-01-26 014214
type theory 2024-01-26 014214
type theory 2024-01-26 032044
type theory 2024-01-26 032044
richard paradox 2024-01-08
richard paradox 2024-01-08
proof theory 2024-01-21
proof theory 2024-01-21

groupoid

groupoid 2024-01-08 MXNr2
groupoid 2024-01-08 MXNr2
groupoid 2024-01-08 2FVNP
groupoid 2024-01-08 2FVNP

new year resolution kinda todo