Subject: categories: cracks and pots 106

From: Eduardo Dubuc <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 19:47:29 -0300 (ART)

In his April 2 posting  (Reminder: Mac Lane Memorial Conference) P. May
refers to the "crack/pot thread" , and we can see his feeling about it.

In particular, he is fed-up. Many people probably share these feelings
(more or less), so I will use him as a generic symbol in this posting.

The cracks and pots debate is "(interminable)" for him. Probably it is
disturbing, and when a disturbing thing refuses to go away, May may get
angry.

He says he choose Baez as an speaker because he likes his mathematics:

What is the point ?.
Besides Motl's original reservations about Baez mathematics applied to
Physics, nobody said that "do not like Baez mathematics". Simply it was
said that it occupied much too room for what it was worth. And I said that
this was so because to-day (for a category theory meeting) there is no
other enthusiastic body of work to take predominant place.

So, what is his point ?

I myself, having to-day to organize a meeting in category theory, will
certainly invite Baez.

Related to, but not the same thing, he goes on saying:

"I myself don't share his interest in physics, but I won't hold it against
him."

What does he mean by "but I won't hold it against him." ?. Had anybody
hold the interest in physics against anyone ?

In cracks_and_pots nobody is holding or had ever hold against Baez his
interest in Physics !!

In cracks and pots it was only objected that

> The category theory community seems happy to accept uncritically, and
> give centre-stage to, any interest shown by an external field.

It is known that  ~(p ==> q)  does not mean  p  ==> ~q , as he seems
to believe
(where   p = he has interest in physics,  q = he is good,  and "~" stands
for negation).

Concerning the meeting proper:

"I urge people who have not yet decided to come
to make their way to Chicago next week.  There we shall all try
to make joyful mathematics, some category theory and some not,
in celebration of the memory of Saunders Mac Lane."

why "try" ?

I warn, "joyful" is not enough.

But, after this warning, do not take me wrong. The joyful side of
mathematics is certainly  in the spirit of Saunders, and besides, judging
by the list of speakers, it will certainly be worth while to attend. I
hope Baez will electronically publish an account of the talks, as he had
done in the past with other meetings. Everybody interested in categories
profit with Baez online.

I toast for a good meeting, the memory of Saunders Mac Lane deserves it.

Eduardo Dubuc