Epistemology
Introduction E9F5FC Questions FFFFC0 Software |
See: Category theory, Yoneda Lemma, Curry-Howard-Lambek Understand topos theory in terms of regularity of choice.
What is a topos?
A representation of topos is a point of view. (Olivia Caramello, TEDx) Presheaf category is the total information. Topos is a weakened, limited set of information. Pullback is crucial because its adjoints are exists and for all. Pullback (and limits) are the basis for making distinctions. What are the adjoints for the push forward? The logic of geometry is based on local coherence. And the global consequences...? are topology? Morita equivalence. Double negation in the simpler, topos world, almost holds - but when you translate into the richer world - you get a highly nontrivial statement. Example: internal view (of complicated curves) are embedded in an external space (and the latter is removed in the topos). Can define objects and math before logic. Sheaves are not interesting but rather, what we see from our external point of view, and what needs to be removed to see the interesting internal point of view. Combinatorics - create objects "for children" - then count them - the formulas appear in other contexts - gives clues for related toposes. "Sketches of an Elephant: A Topos Theory Compendium 2 Volume Set" Topos:
A topos is a category that has the following two properties:
Grothendieck topos Let C be a category. A theorem of Giraud states that the following are equivalent:
A category with these properties is called a "(Grothendieck) topos". Here Presh(D) denotes the category of contravariant functors from D to the category of sets; such a contravariant functor is frequently called a presheaf. Giraud's axioms for a category C are:
The last axiom needs the most explanation. If X is an object of C, an "equivalence relation" R on X is a map R→X×X in C such that for any object Y in C, the induced map Hom(Y,R)→Hom(Y,X)×Hom(Y,X) gives an ordinary equivalence relation on the set Hom(Y,X). Since C has colimits we may form the coequalizer of the two maps R→X; call this X/R. The equivalence relation is "effective" if the canonical map {$R → X × _{X / R}X$} is an isomorphism. Sources
Readings
Videos
Notes
Topos
6 representations
Readings Colin McLarty: As of the summer of 1973 Grothendieck’s stated preferred definition of topos was still: a category with arbitrary colimits, finite limits, and a small generating set. He says over and over this is not quite adequate for proofs. He says proofs require the notion of site, or else the Giraud axioms, but he calls the vaguer idea more intuitive and says that is the way to think about a topos. [Reminds me of topologies, which have arbitrary unions and finite intersections.] |