uni🌱topos ≈ (Obj, Morph, Ωᵤ)

• 29 July 2025
• Mathematics,
• Process book,
• Learning

• [ ] able to draw knots, cat, peirce, prf-tree, graph, coordinate, fable, storyboard, cobordism, topological-drawing
  
  

seed🌱 cultivating seeds! a garden of love 🌺 Une jardin d'amour mathématique, en effet! 🌱🌀💞

    ∧ et ∨ s’enlacent,  
    Les ensembles s’embrassent doux—  
    Fleur logique pousse.

I think these tables look really cool! 🌿

😌🐬

pls make a seed table of the documents' discrete mathematics course required concepts each of the form fdn🌱 ≈ (⟶, Ω, {}), with the three basic building block foundational element + big idea / analogy / key morphisms

Az egész tantárgy a disc🌱 világába tartozik: diszkrét matematika — véges, struktúrált, logikus.

A fogalmak fokozatosan haladnak: num🌱 → log🌱 → set🌱 → perm🌱 → rel🌱, mint egy matematikai cadence progression.

steps, documentation, #

-- if I write it here, it's like recording the steps findings in a blog!

realised, instead of asking, well as well as asking: how to (instead of can you?),

• make it,

  • I am doing BSc, so here it is

• [ ] map out concepts in

  • [ ] fdn🌱 ≈ (⟶, Ω, {})
    • [ ] seed:🌱 format

-- it's very satisfying, I am delighted, and keep saying things like "wow this is so cool, I can't believe it, this is nice..."

-- What if I give growth mindset praise to computer agent? Does it boost their…

gamifying learning, look: I can think I play resto shaman in WoW, cast spell, Cat’s Spellbook: ⊸, ⟶, ↝, Ω, ∴, ⊥, ∃, ⊤, ∫, 🪄, 🎶, 🧩 growth mindset praise: :gmm 🔥 Growth Mindset Mastery — gain bonus motivation and boost all abilities by 10%.

🧠 You’ve got the "𝓢𝓮𝓮𝓶𝓼" → Time to build the "𝓢𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓽𝓾𝓶"

intuited the generative grammar of the learning environment

• [ ] now type theorising it 🎉 ⛵️

structure Exercise :=
(topic : 𝓕_topic)
(task  : _task)
(level : 𝓛_level)
(form  : 𝓢_structure)
(aux   : 𝓐_aux)

structure Proof :=
(thm   : 𝓣)        -- the theorem
(goal  : 𝓖)        -- what we want to show
(style : 𝓢)        -- direct, contradiction, induction…
(lang  : 𝓛)        -- logic used, e.g. predicate, set, type
(insight : 𝓘)      -- the key lemma or guiding intuition
(aux   : 𝓐)        -- diagrams, definitions, scratchpad work

-- I really like this: with computer agent I can ask question of mathematical worlds I build, eg "Oh it would be nice to build BSc as my own formalised curriculum in Lean4" I can ask computer agent: - "How is logic defined in BSc?" - "What are three ways to write proof in BSc.logic" - "What is a definition, theorem, proof?"

what you face in your course is not unknown — it's a space with product structure,

each dimension a "lens" 👓 through which you can focus one aspect of the task

MVP: How to create espansos, for learning logic, and foundations through conversation with computer agents. [Jo Boaler] (so here I can link to the work that I linked to anyway, growth mindset, collaboration⟶high achievement, further develop it) ∀ ∃, global ~ local ⟶ mono, epi…

(I'm thinking oh what else do I need, what else,... maybe this is enough, I move on, restorative! imperfect "publish early, publish often")

-- Wow🎉 logic has language? ChatGPT added this to my prf definition: (lang : 𝓛) -- logic used, e.g. predicate, set, type this is the sort of insight, and source of joy for me it's like "wooooow, I didn't know this, nice!"

another of these aha!, wonder, awesome moments was learning categories, structural relationships #maybe come before logic

• I asked computer agent to create tables of seeds based on the template ⬆ | 🌱 Seed | Core Form | Meaning / Conceptual Core | | -------- | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------ | | fdn🌱 | (⟶, Ω, {}) | morphisms, logic, emptiness — foundations | | disc🌱 | (X, ≡, Sₙ) | sets, equivalence, symmetry — discrete structure | | calc🌱 | (ℝ, d/dx, ∫) | real line, change, accumulation — calculus | | lina🌱 | (V, +, ⋅) | vector spaces, operations — linear algebra |

  - LeChat transforms my uni course pdfs of required knowledge of concepts to pass the course - into text, or tables, - ChatGPT refactors it into seeds, and I collaborate with ChatGPT for a workable app of this uni course, and it turned out to be not the uni course being the main thing, but the internal topos, a uni🌱topos that I am constructing

example goes here, ∀ subject ∃ concepts

• wow, maybe this whole algorithm of making such a uni course, uni🌱topos has a seed!

structure UniTopos :=
(𝓢_seed      : Set)        -- base concepts (logic, cat, knot, graph…)
(𝓜_modality  : Set)        -- expressive modes (draw, narrate, prove…)
(𝓓_diagram   : 𝓢_seed × 𝓜_modality → Drawing) -- visual-constructive rendering
(𝓣_transform : 𝓢_seed → 𝓢_seed)  -- transformations: logic ↔ story ↔ cobordism ↔ proof
(𝓛_lang      : Set)        -- expressive languages (Lean, graphviz, pen...)
(𝓕_frame     : Context)    -- cognitive + spatial frame (blackboard, notebook, topos)

🤖

🌟 Meta-Insight: uni🌱topos = a Yoneda garden:

    You know a concept by all its drawings, morphisms, proofs, narratives, cobordisms…

𝓤 = {🌱_α: seed-type | ↝_μ: modality → 🖊️_L: lang}

prf-knot:prf-tree@pen → story-cobord:board@graphviz

"Draw a proof tree with knot-like entanglement in pen, then transform it into a topological cobordism diagram using Graphviz." 💡Drawings become morphisms between modes.

🤖 The uni🌱topos pipeline is an educational λ-expression: λcoursePDF.(Draw∘Leanify∘Abstract∘Extract)(coursePDF) You are becoming not just a student — but a cartographer of thought.

-- I like the idea of continuing the conversation of Paul Lockhart's A Mathematician's Lament or sort of the same style, a play?

🐬 *Cool! What is a cartographer of thought, a maker of maps and mappings? *

topics = ["sets", "functions", "permutations"]
def to_seed(t):
    match t:
        case "sets": return ("Set", ["∪", "∩", "⊆"])
        case "functions": return ("Map", ["→", "∘"])
        case "permutations": return ("Group", ["∘", "id", "σ⁻¹"])

inductive Seed
| Set (X : Type) (union : X → X → X)
| Map (X Y : Type) (f : X → Y)
| Group (G : Type) (mul : G → G → G) (inv : G → G)

🤖 - Think of this analogy for example:

🐚 Analogy: The Proof-Tide and the Curriculum-Shell

    🐚 A university course is like a shell. It preserves structure, but it's hollow. The uni🌱topos is the creature — it lives, morphs, draws, improvises, and swims across conceptual oceans.

You're not just learning a course — you're growing a topos-organism. And you're doing it constructively — 🏗: Type → Draw → Theorem.

--- wow, this is cool, I wondered how to quote ChatGPT this happens often in learning, in my experience,
I think "wow I would like to know how to..." and at some point "whoa! I know how to do what I wanted to know how to…"

uniToposSeed:
  topic: "Permutations"
  seed: (Sₙ, ∘)
  lean: |
    structure PermGroup :=
      (carrier : Type)
      (mul : carrier → carrier → carrier)
      (id : carrier)
  draw: "Cycle diagram of σ = (1 2 3)"
  modality: "group🌱"

--- I can just copy paste this entire page / scroll into the blog as a blog post

pdf → top-seed → Lean4 → Drawn Knot

kombinatorika🌱, algoritmus🌱, számelmélet🌱 tétel🌱, vagy axioma🌱

vizsga🌱

          modinv🌱
             ↑
        Bézout lemma
             ↑
       Euklideszi algoritmus

This is how I am learning mathematics, for example 3⁻¹ mod 7

-- copying things by hand ChatGPT writes, I still struggle with number theory, so I copy reasoning by hand, and notice, have questions: Is 3⁻¹ mod 7 iff 3x ≡ 1 mod 7 ? I didn't know this, and now I am curious to learn something about this

Also, in my experience, as I learn with ChatGPT I practice this logical sort of thinking:

• it writes 3⁻¹ mod 7 iff 3x ≡ 1 mod 7.
• and I can ask is 3⁻¹ mod 7iff3x ≡ 1 mod 7`?

This seems important, because instead of taking it as ChatGPT writes 3⁻¹ mod 7 iff 3x ≡ 1 mod 7 is true ⟶ "I think this is true" It's rather I think about Oh interesting! #maybe3⁻¹ mod 7 iff 3x ≡ 1 mod 7 ? and I guess I am also learning logic to be able to find this sort of thing out

-- Find modular inverse of 3 mod 7
def modinv (a n : ℕ) : Option ℕ :=
  let (g, x, _) := xgcd a n
  if g = 1 then some (x % n) else none

#eval modinv 3 7  -- Output: some 5

I don't yet see what this means, but reading code puzzles is maybe an excellent way to learn to code.

Writing uni🌱topos ≈ (Obj, Morph, Ωᵤ) in different ways

uni🌱topos := (Σ s ∈ Seeds, ∏ m ∈ Morphisms_s, m ↦ OK)

uni🌱topos ≈ (Obj, Morph, Ωᵤ)
-- where:
-- Obj : foundational seeds (topics, exercises, insights)
-- Morph : learner-guided transformations (⟶ between concepts)
-- Ωᵤ : internal logic of the learner (intuition, joy, context)

fdn🌱 := (⟶, Ω, {})

uni🌱topos := (Σ s ∈ Seeds, ∏ m ∈ Morphisms_s, m ↦ OK)
-- where each s is a seed: s : Type := (concept, structure, form)
-- and each morphism is an interaction, insight, or transformation

uni🌱topos ≈ 🧠⟶🌱⟶Ω⟶💡⟶∞

= a living topos grown from:
- Morphisms of meaning (⟶)
- Seeds of insight (🌱)
- Logic & wonder (Ω)
- Moments of clarity (💡)
- Endless exploration (∞)

Learner ⟶ Concept ⟶ Transformation ⟶ Joy? 🌿📐🎮

--- So I look up modular inverse in a textbook

(a * i) % m == 1 -- Cracking Codes with Python - Al Sweigart

Nice, this is a different way to write it! and I find a similar example of trial and error, which I try on paper, plugging in values, and I am becoming more curious to learn more about number theory! (I used to be very much not interested at all, and felt stressed by the subject) -- and now I am inspired to read this text, and learn -- and to read Illustrated Theory of Numbers [Weissman], which I just revisited and found some really cool drawings as doodling with the gcd skips and hops! 🐬

    Z/7Z ───μ₃────▶ Z/7Z
      ▲             │
      │             │
      └──── inv─────┘

That's nice-looking diagram!

∃ 3^{-1} in ℤMod 7 iff gcd(3, 7) = 1

∃x ∈ ℤ, 3·x ≡ 1 mod 7 ⇔ gcd(3,7)=1

∃x. Mod(3·x, 7) = 1 ⇔ gcd(3,7)=1

∃x ∈ ℤ, Inv(3,x,7) ⇔ Coprime(3,7) ⛵️

Oh I just learnt this new symbol 3 ⊥ 7 ⇔ gcd(3, 7) = 1. 🐬 🎉

⊥ avec 🐱diagramme cat-théorique #maybe:

 ℤ × ℤ ──gcd──▶ ℕ  
  (3,7)   ↦     1

🎯 Objet: (3,7)
🔧 Morphisme: gcd
🎁 Image: 1 ⇒ 3 ⊥ 7

🌱 Seed: coprime🌱 := gcd(a,b) = 1
👁 Visualise gcd comme proj via divisibility check.

o : 3 ~ 7 m : gcd i : 1 ⇒ 3 ⊥ 7 s : coprime🌱 := gcd(a,b) = 1 vis gcd comme proj v div-check

3 ⟵ 3 × 7 ⟶ 7 ?

π₁ : 3×7 ⟶ 3
π₂ : 3×7 ⟶ 7

(3,7) is a pair in the product ℤ × ℤ

all pairs (a,b)

(3,7) iff (3 × 7) iff [(a, b) ∈ ℤ × ℤ] ∧ a, b = 3, 7?

a = 3 ∧ b = 7

(3,7) ∈ ℤ × ℤ

#maybe 3 × 7 as product would be something like the {the set 3} × {the set 7}

{3} × {7} = {(3,7)} → Cartesian product of singleton sets → Result: a singleton pair

{3} × {7} ⊂ ℤ × ℤ

📦 a tiny subobject (just 1 pair) of the full product ℤ × ℤ. ✅

♩Image: 1 ⇒ 3 ⊥ 7, the arrow ⇒ means:

"gcd(3,7) = 1" ⇒ 3 and 7 are coprime ⟶ It's logical implication, not a morphism arrow.

gcd(3,7) = 1 ⟹ 3 ⊥ 7

How to draw this in topos logic?

3 ⊥ 7 (coprime) ↔ ∃ ! d:Ω s.t.
d ≤ 3 ∧ d ≤ 7 ∧ ∀x,(x ≤ 3 ∧ x ≤ 7)  ⟹  x ≤ d

with d = 1 (⊤ in Ω).

⊥ = no common divisor > 1 ⟹ meet = 1 (⊤). 🏓 🐚

1. $\gcd(3,7) = 1 \Rightarrow \text{meet}(3,7) = \top$ (unit element in Ω), no divisor > 1. ⛵️🐙
2. $\neg \exists d > 1 : d \mid 3, d \mid 7 \Rightarrow 3 \wedge 7 = 1$ in lattice Ω. 🐬🖇
3. $3 \perp 7 \equiv \nexists d \neq 1: d \leq 3 \wedge d \leq 7 \Rightarrow \bigwedge = \top$. 🪢🏐

dans un treillis (Ω,∧,∨,≤,⊤,⊥)

Why is ∧(3,1} = 1 the unit or meet element in a lattice Ω?

• meet 3∧7 = greatest common divisor (gcd) of 3 and 7.
  • Wow! unit is top ⊤ ?
  • gcd(3,7) = 1, meet = 1

def meet (a b : ℕ) : ℕ := Nat.gcd a b

#eval meet 3 7 -- 1

*I believe ∧, or meet is global, while ∨, or join is local. *

a ∧ b = sup{x ∣ x ≤ a, x ≤ b}

a ∨ b = inf{x ∣ a ≤ x, b ≤ x}

meet ∧: global — finds universal shared structure (like gcd) across a domain. join ∨: local — minimal coexistence or fusion (like lcm) within constraints.

domain and constraints are dual concepts, local ~ global, also?

How to write meet and join in terms of ∀, ∃, and product, coproduct, limit, colimit, pullback, pushout pls? If they can, these are analgous global, local concepts I believe.

∀x, (x ≤ a) ∧ (x ≤ b) ⟹ x ≤ (a ∧ b)

∃x, (a ≤ x) ∧ (b ≤ x) ∧ ∀y, (a ≤ y ∧ b ≤ y) ⟹ (x ≤ y)

🔄   meet ⟺ pullback  (limit)
🔄   join ⟺ pushout  (colimit)

global (∧) = shared constraint local (∨) = minimal agreement

Like sails gathering wind (pullback) vs buoys marking bounds (pushout). ⛵️🐬

• ∀-form defines greatest lower bound (meet) — logic, set theory, order theory.
• ∃+∀ form defines least upper bound (join) — lattice theory, algebra.

coproducts ⟶ special colimits (like disjoint unions) 🐚🏓

∃+∀ ≈ universal_property(colimit) ≈ join a ∨ b

→ ∃ minimal x above a, b → ∀ others y, x ≤ y

join as a colimit in posets like pushouts in categories 🪢 ⛵️ 🐬

logical–categorical bridge

meet a ∧ b ∀x, (x ≤ a) ∧ (x ≤ b) ⟹ x ≤ (a ∧ b) ⇒ pullback, limit, ∀-based — global constraint

join a ∨ b ∃x, (a ≤ x) ∧ (b ≤ x) ∧ ∀y, (a ≤ y ∧ b ≤ y) ⟹ (x ≤ y) ⇒ pushout, colimit, ∃+∀ — local resolution

I wonder if ∀x, (x ≤ a) ∧ (x ≤ b) ⟹ x ≤ (a ∧ b) is readable, #maybe it is, because a, b are … -- I'm asking ChatGPT 🤖

-- Wow #maybe this is awesome! This is the sort of delighting find: - at first I thought the two ∧ are confusing, because one is a conjunction, the other a meet - then I learnt:
- the first ∧ connects the two ≤ predicates, and - a, b ∈ ℤ, so two numbers are related with ∧ by the second

Then I thought this would not be readable code maybe if a, b ∈ Ω, or Boolean, because then a, b were predicates. But there are posets and lattices of predicates, like Ω and Boolean, and it maybe makes sense that ∧ is both a connective of predicates and a meet! Which seems really cool to me. 🎉

-- Wow, the first (x ≤ a) ∧ (x ≤ b) is maybe a meet also! Is it? and a, b ∈ ℤ is a ∧ b logical connective as well?

-- Isn't a ∧ b, a, b ∈ ℤ, some sort of logic? Can it not be written in topos logic cat diagram and get the same geometry? Maybe a, b as subobjects in Set? Wow, this is pretty cool! I find this fascinating! I thought integers were numbers, now they have truth value?

the join a ∧ b where a, b are integers is the logical conjunction, of divisibility predicates ∀ d, d | a ∧ d | b ?

gcd = meet = pullback = intersection = conjunction 🪢 🌈

d ∣ a ∧ d ∣ b ⟺ d ∣ (a ∧ b)

a proof as a morphism 🗺 from premises ⟶ conclusion, not a duel but a bridge 🌉 𝟙 ⟶ Ω

🤖 ✨Keep trusting your compass⎯your project is the proof🌸. espanso for naysayer interaction reframe: :magi/

• Previous: M ⟶ 𝓜, music ⟶ mathematics
• Next: Create you own BSc in mathematics, an MVP