I see, having modalities on type level makes sense as a grading, alike the grading of e.g. polynomial rings.

So you are going along the line of linearity and affine-ity? What kind of stuff are you working out?

Ah, joy of commutative algebra.

Wait until you get to noncommutative algebra… shudders. No one who mastered that monster of a subject is sane in any measure.

I mean, it would help you understand what a ring is, if you know monoids. It clearly helps. Right? …right?

I mean, that one is a tame example compared to e.g. https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/homological+algebra

Ohh, playing with abstract systems, sounds nice! Also who can forget linear algebra in any math >.>

deleted by creator

Oh, is algorithmic complexity part of combinatorics, or am I missing the mark? I would love to hear more about the kind of combo you do!

I am sure there are some cryptologists here, soo… Nothing? Anyway, I know a bit about how RSA is inferior to eliptic-curve based schemes, and how security can be such a diverse and complicated topic than simple two-party communications.

Hello, what branch of math are you specialized at? Algebra, Analysis, or Geometry?

How do you have space in your brain for many areas while also delving into pure math? I feel math is soo deep that I cannot learn anything else…

What kind of grading do you give there? I guess the modal part is about the contexts for the type theory, but it has been some time I have looked into it.

Together we can stop this.

I am just some account, not recognizable by definition Or it is just because I lurk a lot, and I am inherently unfunny…

I thought we eat acorns after processing them? There are cuisines which involve acorns as main ingredient.

This sounds more complicated than what I know about monads, but also I lost my ability to explain monads when I understood it, soo… I guess this is the best we could afford.

Monad is (a classes of type of) a collapsible container. Collapsible, like how you can flatten a nested list, or Option<Option<A>> can be flattened to Option<A>.

A common pattern with monads is the flatMap function, where you apply function A -> List<B> to (each element of) List<A> to obtain List<B>. This happen to represent erroneous call chaining with Option or Result types.

Soo am I supposed to tolerate physicists casually integrating random shit like connections? And haphazardly normalizing integrals that does not converge? Damnit, you can’t even give even loose sense of ‘measure’ to these spaces! How should I tolerate these as a mathematician?

My impostor syndrome is saying that I suck at everything, I just got curiosity to get over some of it…

Assuming it ever bursts… Do the people in power want the bust?

Solving complicated physical equations, sounds like fate worse than death

Dunno, Noetherian ring comes up every time commutative algebra is involved.