"Daryl McCullough" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... > Stephen Montgomery-Smith says... > >>Gene Ward Smith wrote: > >>> If Norm's article had not been very rude, which it was, I think the >>> response would have been different. >> >>I would describe it as provocative rather than rude. He had a very >>forceful style, but his language stayed professional. > > Are we talking about > http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~norman/papers/SetTheory.pdf > > It might be professional in *tone*, but what it is saying > has no content other than to be insulting. I've just reread > the paper, and page after page contains *no* mathematical > or logical reasoning, it simply makes one unsupported, > insulting claim after another. > > * modern mathematics doesn't make sense > > * mathematicians don't properly understand the content of > high school mathematics > > * modern mathematics is like a religious cult > > * the definition of a real number as an equivalence class of > Cauchy sequences is a joke > > Can you point out a *single* substantive claim in the > entire paper? >
"As I mention in my recent book, this is quite wrong. Think clearly about the subject for a few days, and you will see that the computable real numbers are not countable , and are complete."