coq-club AT inria.fr
Subject: The Coq mailing list
List archive
- From: Daniel Schepler <dschepler AT gmail.com>
- To: Victor Porton <porton AT narod.ru>
- Cc: Andrej Bauer <andrej.bauer AT andrej.com>, Coq <coq-club AT inria.fr>
- Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?
- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 14:00:07 -0700
I strongly suspect it has quotient sets, contrary to what Andrej says about impossibility to define a quotient set in type theory.
In my ZornsLemma contribution, I construct quotient types using the usual construction as the set of equivalence classes. Certainly, you need to assume Extensionality_Ensembles to prove the quotient projection map collapses R to strict equality; and you need to use constructive_definite_description to construct induced functions on a quotient type. So yes, it's probably useless if you need things to be computable at the end. But if what you're doing is pure mathematical formalization, I don't see any drawbacks to using this construction.
--
Daniel Schepler
--
Daniel Schepler
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, (continued)
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Victor Porton
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Andrej Bauer
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Victor Porton
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Andrej Bauer
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Victor Porton
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Andrej Bauer
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Adam Chlipala
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Daniel Schepler
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Adam Chlipala
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Victor Porton
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Daniel Schepler
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Andrej Bauer
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Daniel Schepler
- Re: [Coq-Club] Where is the set theory?, Adam Chlipala
Archive powered by MhonArc 2.6.16.