# Pi Types
We will try to formulate and prove the statement
> The sum of two even naturals is even.
## Defining Addition
To do so we must define `+` on the naturals.
Addition takes in two naturals and spits out a natural,
so it should have type `ℕ → ℕ → ℕ`.
```agda
_+_ : ℕ → ℕ → ℕ
n + m = ?
```
Try coming up with a sensible definition.
It may not look 'the same' as ours.
Hint
`n + 0` should be `n` and `n + (m + 1)` should be `(n + m) + 1`
## The Statement
Now we can make the statement:
```agda
SumOfEven : (x : Σ ℕ isEven) → (y : Σ ℕ isEven) → isEven (x .fst + y .fst)
SumOfEven x y = ?
```
> Tip: `x .fst` is another notation for `fst x`.
> This works for all sigma types.
There are three ways to interpret this:
- For all even naturals `x` and `y`,
their sum is even.
- `isEven (x .fst + y .fst)` is a construction depending on two recipes
`x` and `y`.
Given two recipes `x` and `y` of `Σ ℕ isEven`,
we break them down into their first components,
apply the conversion `_+_`,
and form a recipe for `isEven` of the result.
- `isEven (_ .fst + _ .fst)` is a bundle over the categorical product
`Σ ℕ isEven × Σ ℕ isEven` and `SumOfEven` is a _section_ of the bundle.
More generally given `A : Type` and `B : A → Type`
we can form the _pi type_ `(x : A) → B x : Type`
(in other languages `Π (x : ℕ), isEven n`).
The notation suggests that these behave like functions,
and indeed in the special case where the fiber is constant
with respect to the base space
a section is just a term of type `A → B`, i.e. a function.
Hence pi types are also known as _dependent function types_.
We are now in a position to prove the statement. Have fun!
## Remarks
_Important_: Once you have proven the statement,
check out our two ways of defining addition `_+_` and `_+'_`
(in the solutions).
- Use `C-c C-n` to check that they compute the same values
on different examples.
- Uncomment the code for `Sum'OfEven` in the solutions.
It is just `SumOfEven` but with `+`s changed for `+'`s.
- Load the file. Does the proof still work?
Our proof `SumOfEven` relied on
the explicit definition of `_+_`,
which means if we wanted to use our proof on
someone else's definition of addition,
it might not work anymore.
> But `_+_` and `_+'_` compute the same values.
> Are `_+_` and `_+'_` 'the same'? What is 'the same'?
## Another Task : Decidability of `isEven`
As the final task of the Quest,
try to express and prove in agda the statement
> For any natural number it is even or is is not even.
We will make a summary of what is needed:
- a definition of the type `A ⊕ B` (input `\oplus`),
which has three interpretations
- the proposition '`A` or `B`'
- the construction with two ways of making recipes
`left : A → A ⊕ B`
and `right : B → A ⊕ B`.
- the coproduct of two objects `A` and `B`.
The type needs to take in parameters `A : Type` and `B : Type`
```agda
data _⊕_ (A : Type) (B : Type) : Type where
???
```
- a definition of negation. One can motivate it by the following
- Define `A ↔ B : Type` for two types `A : Type` and `B : Type`.
- Show that for any `A : Type` we have `(A ↔ ⊥) ↔ (A → ⊥)`
- Define `¬ : Type → Type` to be `λ A → (A → ⊥)`.
- a formulation and proof of the statement above