CZ Talk:Core Articles/Mathematics: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Paul Wormer |
imported>Peter Jackson |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:You are free to change it. Probably was put there by somebody who—like me—doesn't know exactly what category theory is. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 15:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | :You are free to change it. Probably was put there by somebody who—like me—doesn't know exactly what category theory is. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 15:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
::I can't see where it's gone now. It's true in a sense that CT is more general than algebra, as it includes topology, for example. But it treats it in an algebraic way, so I think it tends to be regarded as a branch of algebra. | |||
::Where is topology on the list, anyway? Can't see that anywhere either, fairly major branch. | |||
::For that matter, most of the headings don't include themselves, if you see what I mean. And we have Lie group and Group representation, but not Group. ... | |||
::All in all, it looks pretty poorly thought out. Maybe Peter Schmitt could find time to look. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 10:58, 1 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:58, 1 November 2014
Position of Category Theory in the list.
Category Theory is at or near the highest level of abstraction in mathematics and is certainly more abstract than algebra. Why is Category Th. listed as subordinate to Algebra? Thanks, Peter Lyall Easthope 23:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- You are free to change it. Probably was put there by somebody who—like me—doesn't know exactly what category theory is. --Paul Wormer 15:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- I can't see where it's gone now. It's true in a sense that CT is more general than algebra, as it includes topology, for example. But it treats it in an algebraic way, so I think it tends to be regarded as a branch of algebra.
- Where is topology on the list, anyway? Can't see that anywhere either, fairly major branch.
- For that matter, most of the headings don't include themselves, if you see what I mean. And we have Lie group and Group representation, but not Group. ...
- All in all, it looks pretty poorly thought out. Maybe Peter Schmitt could find time to look. Peter Jackson 10:58, 1 November 2014 (UTC)