Timeline for answer to Precise meaning of "picking a basis"? by Carlo Beenakker
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 16 at 16:48 | comment | added | LSpice | @TimothyChow, re, I think I meant "inverse" (which is of course equivalent to the converse). But, yes, certainly not "contrapositive", thanks! | |
| Jan 16 at 16:31 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | @LSpice I think you mean the "converse" rather than the "contrapositive"? | |
| Jan 15 at 23:13 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jan 15 at 23:13 | comment | added | LSpice | I think I buy only the contrapositive of your second sentence (a proof does not pick a basis if it defines a functorial construction—although I think one could fruitfully argue against even this, since there are a lot of contexts in which one does a construction that clearly does involve a basis but then shows that it is actually basis independent), but not your second sentence as written (surely there are other ways to be non-functorial?). | |
| Jan 15 at 22:54 | history | edited | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 503 characters in body
|
| Jan 15 at 22:43 | history | answered | Carlo Beenakker | CC BY-SA 4.0 |