FOM: human well-being; constructivism; anti-foundation
amah8857 at brain.math.fau.edu
Thu Jan 4 09:24:23 EST 2001
At 06:34 PM 1/2/01, Andrej wrote:
>(1) A question:
>Matthew Frank <mfrank at math.uchicago.edu> writes:
> > Hilbert responded to Brouwer (according to Reid's biography, p. 184)
> > with a slight variation of this: "with your methods most of the
> > results of modern mathematics would have to be abandoned, and to me
> > the important thing is not to get fewer results but to get more
> > results."
>I've heard several times (e.g. Beeson's Foundations of Constructive
>Mathematics) that both Hilbert and Brouwer _erroneously_ expected that
>"most results of modern mathematics would have to be abandoned" in an
>intuitionistic setting. Does anyone know of _specific_ remarks or
>comments by Hilbert and/or Brouwer that would indicate more precisely
>which theorems or parts of mathematics they expected to evaporate
Can't talk about Brouwer's Intuitionism, but in Bishop's mathematics
general topology so important and interesting in classical setting is
missing. Here is what Bishop wrote in beginning of Chapter 3, Bishop-Bridges.
"Very little is left of general topology after that vehicle of classical
mathematics has been taken apart and reassembled constructively".
I once heard from Bridges that this was probably a premature comment. How
important is topology? Any comments!
More information about the FOM