Is homotopy type theory an inscrutable but worthy challenge in trying to understand, the process of which is rewarding and elicits a paradigm-shift in the way I think about things? Or is it an elaborate dick joke?
Also, pic related vs Simulacra and Simulation thread.
Well, it couldn't possibly be worse than current foundations.
>>7533800
Could you elaborate? Are you referring to our popularly accepted axiomatic systems a la Euclid, or something else?
>>7533914
Our current Cantorian "axiomatic" systems are absolutely nothing like the axioms of Euclid. See Norman J. Wildberger for more details: http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~norman/views2.htm
Pretentious as fuck. Kill yourself, pseudointellectual.
>>7533939
Wildberger is a crack, and he has thorough lack of understanding of the current foundations. Literally no respected mathematician takes him seriously.
>>7533770
HoTT is meme theory. Which doesn't mean it's bad, but there are better things to learn at this moment. With time HoTT might get more fleshed out, and we'll be able to see if it really brings anything new to the table.
For now, if you really want to do something meme-like, you learn category theory.
>>7533989
The only reason he doesn't understand them, is because they can't be understood, as they make no sense :)
>>7533939
Just noticed that some images on that page are missing. Read this PDF instead: http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~norman/papers/SetTheory.pdf
>>7534018
>implying math and literature aren't two peas in a pod, feeding off one another to produce ever-more complex and aesthetic ways of understanding the world
The univalence axiom sounds like fun:
"In other words, identity is equivalent to equivalence. In particular, one may say that 'equivalent types are identical'".
>>7534096
That is Paulo Coelho tier retarded.
>>7534096
>An equation such as “a=b” is a mathematical proposition in which two different symbols have the same value. In homotopy type theory, this is taken to mean that the two shapes which represent the values of the symbols are topologically equivalent.
