Rupert wrote: > Obviously if Norm was going to > present his ideas in lectures he'd have to give a fair amount of time > to competing ideas as well.
There are no competing ideas. NW is doing something completely idiosyncratic and it is far from clear that anyone else has ever had a similar goal, which would be a pre-requisite for anything to "compete".
Notwithstanding that, the project that NW has embarked on by publishing these views via his homepage is ENTIRELY worthwhile. NW himself said that he was presenting this via a channel that he hoped would allow INformal communication that would be freer and possibly more fruitful than anything you could bring to a conference/formal-presentation setting. It behooves the rest of us to consider this in the spirit in which it was offered. Which we mostly haven't done in this forum, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're being uncharitable. If you are actually friends with somebody then there IS a friendly way to tell him he has said something Completely Ridiculous. His having made that mistake should not in any way detract from anyone's ability to engage him constructively on any other points he may be making simultaneously that are NOT ridiculous. Since Rupert introduced this, I think it is more incumbent upon Rupert than upon anyone else to SEPARATE THE ISSUES here and try to make sure that NW gets some constructive feedback. I personally separated one of them (good for me) by publishing the definitions of infinity. The next one that needs to be separated is about the relevance of axioms generally; somebody needs to smack NW upside the head with a copy of the axioms HE uses in HIS favorite disciplines.