stuff

_chapters/04_order.md

@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ The above set is not linearly-ordered - although the connection establishes the
 Greatest and least 
 ---
 
-Although posets don't give us definitive answer to who is better than who, some of them still can give us an answer to the more important question (in sports, as well as in other domains), namely *who is number one*, who is the champion, the player who is better than anyone else, or more generally the element that is bigger than any other element. 
+Although partial orders don't give us definitive answer to who is better than who, some of them still can give us an answer to the more important question (in sports, as well as in other domains), namely *who is number one*, who is the champion, the player who is better than anyone else, or more generally the element that is bigger than any other element. 
 
 We call such elements the *greatest element* and some (not all) partial orders do have such element - in our last diagram **M** is the greatest element, in this diagram, the green element is the biggest one.
 
@@ -239,21 +239,21 @@ We can define what is called the *inclusion order* of those sets, in which **A**
 
 Note that the *join* operation in an inclusion order is the set union, and the *meet* operation as set intersection.
 
-This diagram might remind you of something, because if we take the colors that are in each of its set and mix it into one color, we get the color-blending poset that we saw earlier.
+This diagram might remind you of something, because if we take the colors that are in each of its set and mix it into one color, we get the color-blending partial order that we saw earlier.
 
 ![A color mixing poset, ordered by inclusion](color_mixing_poset_blend.svg)
 
-The poset example with the number dividers is also isomorphic to an inclusion order - the inclusion order of all possible sets of *prime* numbers, including repeating ones (or alternatively the set of all *prime powers*). This is confirmed by the fundamental theory of arithmetic, which states that every number can be written as a product of primes in exactly one way.
+The order example with the number dividers is also isomorphic to an inclusion order - the inclusion order of all possible sets of *prime* numbers, including repeating ones (or alternatively the set of all *prime powers*). This is confirmed by the fundamental theory of arithmetic, which states that every number can be written as a product of primes in exactly one way.
 
 ![Divides poset](divides_poset_inclusion.svg)
 
 Order isomorphisms
 ---
 
-We mentioned order isomorphisms several times already so this is about time to elaborate a bit about what they are. Take the isomorphism between the number poset and the prime inclusion order as an example. Like an isomorphism between any two sets, it is comprised of two functions: 
+We mentioned order isomorphisms several times already so this is about time to elaborate a bit about what they are. Take the isomorphism between the number partial order and the prime inclusion order as an example. Like an isomorphism between any two sets, it is comprised of two functions: 
 
-- One function from the prime inclusion order, to the number poset (which in this case is just the *multiplication* of all the elements in the set) 
-- One function from the number poset to the prime inclusion order (which is an operation called *prime factorization* of a number, consisting of finding the set of prime numbers that result in that number when multiplied with one another). 
+- One function from the prime inclusion order, to the number order (which in this case is just the *multiplication* of all the elements in the set) 
+- One function from the number order to the prime inclusion order (which is an operation called *prime factorization* of a number, consisting of finding the set of prime numbers that result in that number when multiplied with one another). 
 
 ![Divides poset](divides_poset_isomorphism.svg)
 
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ By the way, the partial orders that are *NOT* distributive lattices are also iso
 Lattices
 ===
 
-In the previous section we mentioned what *lattices* are - they are posets, in which every two elements have a *join* and a *meet*. So every lattice is also partial order, but not every partial order is a lattice (we will see even more members of this hierarchy). Most partial orders that are created based on some sort of rule, like the ones from the previous section, are also lattices when they are drawn in full, for example the color-mixing poset.
+In the previous section we mentioned what *lattices* are - they are partial orders, in which every two elements have a *join* and a *meet*. So every lattice is also partial order, but not every partial order is a lattice (we will see even more members of this hierarchy). Most partial orders that are created based on some sort of rule, like the ones from the previous section, are also lattices when they are drawn in full, for example the color-mixing order.
 
 ![A color mixing lattice](color_mixing_lattice.svg)
 
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ Our color-mixing lattice, has a *greatest element* (the black ball) and a *least
 Semilattices and trees
 ---
 
-Lattices are posets that have both *join* *and* *meet* for each pair of elements. Posets that just have *join* (and no *meet*), or just have *meet* and no *join* are called *semilattices*. More specifically, posets that have *meet* for every pair of elements are called *meet-semilattices*.
+Lattices are partial orders that have both *join* *and* *meet* for each pair of elements. Partial orders that just have *join* (and no *meet*), or just have *meet* and no *join* are called *semilattices*. More specifically, partial orders that have *meet* for every pair of elements are called *meet-semilattices*.
 
 ![Semilattice](semilattice.svg)
 

proposal.md

@@ -226,6 +226,23 @@ Feedback
 
 My book received a lot of positive feedback and a lot of people shared it on social media. 
 
+Quotes
+---
+Attaching the quotes here, see you tomorrow.
+
+    "The range of applications for category theory is immense, and visually conveying meaning through illustration is an indispensable skill for organizational and technical work. Unfortunately, the foundations of category theory, despite much of their utility and simplicity being on par with Venn Diagrams, are locked behind resources that assume far too much academic background.
+
+    As Gilbert Strang offered in his critique of the typical pre-calc, calc (1-3), diff eq courses in "Too Much Calculus" (http://siags.siam.org/siagla/articles/Strang2001.pdf) in favor of linear algebra, similar arguments can be made for promoting statistics, discrete mathematics, or category theory.
+
+    Should category theory be considered for this academic purpose or any work wherein clear thinking and explanations are valued, beginner-appropriate resources are essential. There is no book on category theory that makes its abstractions so tangible as "Category Theory Illustrated" does. I recommend it for programmers, managers, organizers, designers, or anyone else who values the structure and clarity of information, processes, and relationships."
+
+[Evan Burchard](https://www.oreilly.com/pub/au/7124), Author of "The Web Game Developer's Cookbook" and "Refactoring JavaScript"
+
+    "The clarity, consistency and elegance of diagrams in 'Category Theory Illustrated' has helped us demystify and explain in simple terms a topic often feared."
+
+[Gonzalo Casas](https://gnz.io/), Software developer, leading courses at digital/robotic fabrication for PHD students at ETH Zurich
+
+
 Comments
 ---