Does anyone know if there is there a name for the idea that new concepts (such as negative numbers, complex numbers or type constructors in a type system) are only ever introduced into a preexisting "system" so that they can be eliminated later, after helping make some progress?
-
-
Replying to @propensive
it sounds like lift in pedestrian fp, we say lift to mean raising A to F[A]. the motivation is for the convenience of F[A1] => F[A2], (F[A1], F[A2]) => F[A3], etc that are complicated in A space, but it could be more general like ℝ => ℍhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_(mathematics) …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @eed3si9n
That's reminded me of a stats lecture I had in 2002. I remember nothing except the lecturer's description of a "dual" as like taking the elevator (i.e. "lift") down to the ground floor where you can move around easily, before taking a different lift up a different building...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @propensive @eed3si9n
Interesting, for me the dual is _the other side of the mirror_, whereas lifting is moving to a "higher" (more complex, with more properties, etc)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @berenguel @eed3si9n
I think that the idea of a dual *became* a mirror for me, but back then, before I had an intuition, I found this lift explanation useful. The mirror doesn't give quite the same sense of it being "easier to move around" on one side than the other.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @propensive @eed3si9n
It's like a magical place where things are different (the kicker for me was the duality in projective geometry) ¯\﹍(ツ)﹍/¯ The problem with lift is that lift(lift) should be id, but it's "the second floor"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yes, I agree... elevators have more parameters than we want in our analogy!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.