You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 6, 2024. It is now read-only.
We eventually want to support full-on automated theorem prover integration, but would it be possible to model a handful of simple relationships between spaces ("is a (closed) subspace of", "is a product of")?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
On a related note, I'm also imagining a functor model, that does things like send X \mapsto C_p(X). C_p theory in particular has lots of nice results such as when X is T_{3.5}, X is sigma-compact if and only if C_p(X) is Markov countably fan tight. So if S42 represents X and F13 represents applying C_p, we could have "spaces" like S42+F13 to represent C_p(X), and pi-base automatically converts the properties of X into the properties of C_p(X). In the case that C_p(X) is has been specifically studied in the literature and additional results not characterized by the functor itself are known, then a new space (and new uid) should be added to the database, and S42+F13 could redirect to it.
We eventually want to support full-on automated theorem prover integration, but would it be possible to model a handful of simple relationships between spaces ("is a (closed) subspace of", "is a product of")?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: