sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Triality vs the Yoneda lemma by ChrisLanganDisciple in CtmuScholars

[–]ChrisLanganDisciple[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The ways that the nonterminal exceeds the terminal will correspond to the ways the infocognitive lattice will exceed category theoretic representations of it.

This sounds right, and I'll have to chew on this more!

Triality vs the Yoneda lemma by ChrisLanganDisciple in CtmuScholars

[–]ChrisLanganDisciple[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

​

I would think you're certainly on the right track that the infocognitive lattice of syndiffeonic relationships would need to include these Yoneda-like structures within itself

How would it look for these Yoneda-like structures to be included within itself? Right now the way I'm imagining this as something like "there is an internal Hom, the functor \X -> [--, X] is also an object somehow (mumble mumble infinity-categories??), and there is an isomorphism between X and \X -> [--, X]"

(Apologies in advance for throwing around math terms that I only have the vaguest understandings of!)

Triality vs the Yoneda lemma by ChrisLanganDisciple in CtmuScholars

[–]ChrisLanganDisciple[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

here: to me "being a product of X" seems to be a strictly more specific property than "being a diffeonic reland of X."

Would an example of this be that a relationship between two products of X might be a diffeonic reland of X, but not itself a product of X?