It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

- All Categories 2.2K
- Applied Category Theory Course 355
- Applied Category Theory Seminar 4
- Exercises 149
- Discussion Groups 49
- How to Use MathJax 15
- Chat 480
- Azimuth Code Project 108
- News and Information 145
- Azimuth Blog 149
- Azimuth Forum 29
- Azimuth Project 189
- - Strategy 108
- - Conventions and Policies 21
- - Questions 43
- Azimuth Wiki 711
- - Latest Changes 701
- - - Action 14
- - - Biodiversity 8
- - - Books 2
- - - Carbon 9
- - - Computational methods 38
- - - Climate 53
- - - Earth science 23
- - - Ecology 43
- - - Energy 29
- - - Experiments 30
- - - Geoengineering 0
- - - Mathematical methods 69
- - - Meta 9
- - - Methodology 16
- - - Natural resources 7
- - - Oceans 4
- - - Organizations 34
- - - People 6
- - - Publishing 4
- - - Reports 3
- - - Software 21
- - - Statistical methods 2
- - - Sustainability 4
- - - Things to do 2
- - - Visualisation 1
- General 39

Options

Count the number of non-ID columns in Eq. (3.1). Count the number of arrows in Eq. (3.2). They should be the same number; is this a coincidence?

**Equation 3.1**

$$
\begin{array}{c|ccc}
Employee & FName & WorksIn & Mngr \\
\hline
1 & Alan & 101 & 2 \\
2 & Ruth & 101 & 2 \\
3 & Kris & 102 & 3
\end{array}
$$
$$
\begin{array}{c|cc}
Department & FName & WorksIn & Mngr \\
\hline
101 & Sales & 1 \\
102 & IT & 3
\end{array}
$$
**Equation 3.2**

## Comments

I guuss Equation 3.1 should read:

Equation 3.1$$ \begin{array}{c|ccc} Employee & FName & WorksIn & Mngr \\ \hline 1 & Alan & 101 & 2 \\ 2 & Ruth & 101 & 2 \\ 3 & Kris & 102 & 3 \end{array} $$ $$ \begin{array}{c|cc} Department & DName & Secr& \\ \hline 101 & Sales & 1 \\ 102 & IT & 3 \end{array} $$ In which case, the number of non-ID columns is 5, the same as the number of arrows in Equation 3.2. This is not a coincidence, since Equation 3.1 is an instantiation of Equation 3.2. In particular, each non-ID column represents the image of the ID column under a function, which is the instantiation of one of the arrows in Equation 3.2.

`I guuss Equation 3.1 should read: **Equation 3.1** \[ \begin{array}{c|ccc} Employee & FName & WorksIn & Mngr \\\\ \hline 1 & Alan & 101 & 2 \\\\ 2 & Ruth & 101 & 2 \\\\ 3 & Kris & 102 & 3 \end{array} \] \[ \begin{array}{c|cc} Department & DName & Secr& \\\\ \hline 101 & Sales & 1 \\\\ 102 & IT & 3 \end{array} \] In which case, the number of non-ID columns is 5, the same as the number of arrows in Equation 3.2. This is not a coincidence, since Equation 3.1 is an instantiation of Equation 3.2. In particular, each non-ID column represents the image of the ID column under a function, which is the instantiation of one of the arrows in Equation 3.2.`