Category Theory
↑ 35 References
There is almost certainly a better way to represent functions between notes in this category theory representation (is it just haskell?), but I thought I’d put this attempt to the test for a while.
There is almost certainly a better way to represent functions between notes in this category theory representation (is it just haskell?), but I thought I’d put this attempt to the test for a while.
Epistemology and category theory. Besides ethics, my philosophical interests have always lied in trying to find the underlying “physics” of how we think. This is partially why I always fascinated by computer science, and from there my interest in functional programming lead me to category theory. I am super interested in continuing to explore what fundamental concepts make up our thoughts, our language, and the systems that we build as humans. Additionally, I would consider myself a bayesian and believe we can do a lot to improve the way we think about the world by adopting a probabilistic, bayesian-oriented lens on reality. This interest has also been connected to my interest in synthesizing knowledge and knowledge graphs generally, and is why I have been publishing a subset of my personal notes on my website (denizaydemir.com).
This of course means that you can also have arrows from “edges” to “edges”, but not sure that most note repositories will find that useful. Nonetheless, another nod to category theory by adding a way to sort of create functors.
Side note: I’m thinking about category theory and considering knowledge graphs to be categories and translations between them to be functors.
Even if knowledge cannot be represented as a graph, it does seem like a lot can be represented as a category theory Category
This of course means that you can also have arrows from “edges” to “edges”, but not sure that most note repositories will find that useful. Nonetheless, another nod to category theory by adding a way to sort of create functors.
Has some structural similarities to category theory, where you abstract away the details of the individual objects in the category, and now only about the way they interact with each other.
There is a nod here to category theory. I’m not yet sure what to make of it, but I have a desire to make a note-taking language that can essentially be the language of category theory. If ever achieved, then, in theory, anything that can be represented by a Category can be represented as knowledge graph of notes.
These notes are made up of nested blocks (i.e. bullet points). You can access a block directly by clicking the arrow on the right side of the block. In theory, this could be a way to link between different people’s notes (i.e. Knowledge Graphs), and have direct access to the block hierarchy in published notes the same way one does in Logseq. Long-term, I hope to use this system to add more semantic meaning to the linked connections between notes, and explore the possible ramifications of surfacing their underlying categorical structure.
Why is Abstract Algebra important? I think it is related to logic, philosophy, category theory, and mathematical logic.
In my mind, this is a more formal and categorical version of building a knowledge graph in logseq.
I study the ways personal and interpersonal systems can be made functional to improve cognitive simplicity, including borrowing ideas from category theory and other metamathematical ideas.
here I am using the term category theory term functor to describe a (potentially lossy) translation between two “knowledge graphs”
There is a nod here to category theory. I’m not yet sure what to make of it, but I have a desire to make a note-taking language that can essentially be the language of category theory. If ever achieved, then, in theory, anything that can be represented by a Category can be represented as knowledge graph of notes.
These notes are made up of nested blocks (i.e. bullet points). You can access a block directly by clicking the arrow on the right side of the block. In theory, this coulud be a way to link between different people’s notes (i.e. Knowledge Graphs), and have direct access to the block hierarchy in published notes the same way one does in Logseq. Long-term, I hope to use this system to add more semantic meaning to the linked connections between notes, and explore the possible ramifications of surfacing their underlying categorical structure.
Similarly to the category theory relationship, in the back of my head I think of this as a functional language for writing.
Similarly to the category theory relationship, in the back of my head I think of this as a functional language for writing.