"It provoked some hostility, too, mostly on the side of classical analysts; they approved of rigour but not of high abstraction. Around 1950, also, some parts of geometry were still not fully axiomatic — in less prominent developments, one way or another, these were brought into line with the new foundational standards, or quietly dropped. This undoubtedly led to a gulf with the way theoretical physics is practised.[5]"
we haven't even taken this to where it goes in other arenas. playing softly here, for the benefit of the uninitiated. On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:51 PM, glerm soares <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 2009/5/6 Jon Mitten <[email protected]> >> >> I was, of course, referring to this: > > > http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/impostor.png > http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/no_pun_intended.png > > http://xkcd.com/267/ > > > > -*-*--**---***-----*****--------******** > Harvard & Roy Arts Council > list options: > http://grauwald.com/mailman/listinfo/hrac_grauwald.com > -*-*--**---***-----*****--------******** > -*-*--**---***-----***** > -*-*--**---*** > -*-*--** > -*-* > -* > > -*-*--**---***-----*****--------******** Harvard & Roy Arts Council list options: http://grauwald.com/mailman/listinfo/hrac_grauwald.com -*-*--**---***-----*****--------******** -*-*--**---***-----***** -*-*--**---*** -*-*--** -*-* -*
