coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Adam Chlipala <adamc AT hcoop.net>
- To: Cedric.Auger AT lri.fr
- Cc: coq-club AT pauillac.inria.fr
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs
- Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:47:47 -0400
- List-archive: <http://pauillac.inria.fr/pipermail/coq-club/>
AUGER Cédric wrote:
I may be wrong, but there is also cardinal impossibility for that
isomorphism:
cnat is a lot bigger than nat and even bigger than reals (true reals, not
floating ones), since for each real x, there exists a cnat c such that "c
real 0 _ = x", and as there is no bijection between nat and reals, there
is no bijection between nat and cnat.
Isn't every type not provably bigger than [nat] in Coq, since every nameable value of every type (and thus every value that we're sure exists in every model of CIC) corresponds to a finite string of Coq syntax? I'm not so up on the meta-theoretic issues here, but it seems like constructivity should break the usual cardinality arguments.
- [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs, AUGER Cédric
- Re: [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs, Adam Chlipala
- Re: [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs, Bruno Barras
- Re: [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs, Bruno Barras
- Re: [Coq-Club] Re: Coq-club digest, Vol 1 #1172 - 3 msgs, Adam Chlipala
Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.