—-”there exists a triangular equivalence in theory of computation between fields. We have philosophy that gives us intuitionistic logic. We have mathematics that gives us category theory. Then in computer science we have type theory”—-
The scope of content in those few sentences is priceless. I’m trying to think of how I can deflate it into operational (scientific) language. (ie: Whenever you use the word ‘is’ – the verb-to-be in any of its forms – you don’t understand the causal relations.)
a) constant relations (intuition)
b) positional relations. (categories)
c) dimensional relations. (types)
d) symmetric relations (symmetries, externalities, consequences) (models)
e) and then repeat at the next level of hierarchy.
All we are ever discussing is constant relations in some number of dimensions until we produce new identities (a) that we can define relations between (b) so that we can construct descriptions (c) so that we can model outcomes (d).
“Constant relations all the way down’.
Apr 15, 2018 6:21pm