Afternoon talk / Part 2 / evening conversations

0:00 Well-known to Kant and Hegel and whatever their philosophy was, they at least knew that we were not in that sort of place. But the base of quantum and motion is very essential to mathematical philosophy. You can't deny that. Absolutely. Absolutely deny it. And of course you're right, these are lots of big questions. And across these points to philosophers with very straightforward mathematical explanations and examples. Although it would be necessary to give them, but you could introduce them to this objective idealistic fact. I'm going to completely overthrow this view. Just for your charge, they get in some points, right? We could almost discourage about 10,000 students. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, yeah. It's similar every time it's explained. You can do three or four series. It's precisely the natural, the extra, the core view of a space equation. It's not a real thing. Yes, exactly what I'm saying. So, you know, we're singing to the choir as usual. I didn't see this project seriously in the next hour.

2:30 That would, I think, be a really worthwhile scientific effort, and it would do a great deal to turn aside the effects of this kind of claim that you see in wiki. I mean, because the book should be written at an accessible level in an absolutely responsible way. Basic notions of category theory are needed in order to explain the claim that it is precisely the Ptero-Cyber system. The idea is distortion of mathematics and to restore them. The understanding of it was obviously immensely the people who first lead us to see that this is still a variation of the subject matter of mathematics. I mean, the more you can expect the set theorists or people like Jones to see immediately that what's going on with his Euclidean arithmetic could be illuminated by thinking about, you know, I'm very convinced of, you know, Fields medal winning combinatorialists, but reading on Wikipedia that Thomas theory has a reputation for obscurity and therefore discouraged from learning it, that's my kind of target audience.

5:00 I'm never going to be able to presume the years I've spent on what you may have thought of the Dutchman. A reasonable job of softening up John Maybrick in the last 10, 20 years, but the comparison with where he was really... ...the non-uniqueness of the national order. Well, John was telling us about that. There are many different... Can I thank you, too? No, I think you asked so many of the great questions and fantastic things. You said to me, we're not going to do any philosophy here. I thought, oh, in fact, what you did was true philosophy, in my view. Especially the other day when you talked about those writings. And everything you said about the application of the toposis, to me, has been absolutely central to what a real philosophy of mathematics should be about. Is that all right? Okay. Wait a minute.