> > Read this piece of crap: > http://de.arxiv.org/abs/math/0505649 > And then answer the question, with explicit references to that document, why > it should make any sense to contemplate the views on mathematics of that > person. The only interesting question I can see is: What the hell has gone > wrong that so-called "homo sapiens" drowns in such nonsense? >
And, secondly, I am fairly isolated from any mathematical discourse at all in real life. Anything is better than nothing -- for a short while, at least.
Thanks to William Hughes and Virgil, I came to recognize a way to think about cardinal numbers purely in terms of impredicative choice functions.
Thanks to William Hughes and Virgil, I came to recognize how WM's arguments relate to forcing arguments in set theory by virtue of the directed set structure.
Thanks to William Hughes and Virgil, I came to recognize the relationship between Euclid's proof that there does not exist a greatest prime, the directed set structure of the natural numbers, and the successor.
Thanks to William Hughes and Virgil, I came to recognize the role of triangular numbers relative to directed set structure for a system of finite models as a rationale for intuitionistic views such as found in Brouwer's defnition of set.
Sadly, it is WM's theory of monotonic inclusive crayon marks that motivated these observations. I would rather not see these threads. But, the steps I went through to find a kernel of mathematical reasoning among the nonsense has been educational. And, I would not have had this benefit without the constrast between real mathematics and ...