On 7/15/2013 7:38 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > On Saturday, 13 July 2013 18:41:36 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote: > >> I can count head of cattle or stones with a Strictly Finite system. > However, it is very difficult to define a Surface Integral and > most likely impossible to prove FLT in any form of Finitism. > > Please don't try to mislead newbies. > Cantor's self-contradictory ideas have nothing to do with mathematics: > > In his concluding chapters, Feferman uses tools from the special part of logic called proof theory to explain how the vast part if not all of scientifically applicable mathematics can be justified on the basis of purely arithmetical principles. At least to that extent, the question raised in two of the essays of the volume, "Is Cantor Necessary?", is answered with a resounding "no". > http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/book98.html >
I may believe predicativists who seem aligned with Feferman when zero shows up at the door and invites me for a drink, or when my brother's wife wastefully buys a box of ones at the shopping mall.
How is it so that numbers are *given*?
Hilbert's chicken scratches are no less ridiculous than yours.
(And for those who wish to comment on my contemptuousness, PLEASE READ KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON TO UNDERSTAND HILBERT AND BROUWER)