The kind of crank with a PhD from Yale that has taught at Toronto uni, Stanford etc?
Or is it impossible to have contrarian views to basic tenets of a human-made axiomatic system such as math without being called a blasphemer?
>If I understand correctly, he goes even farther and claims even really big but finite numbers don't "exist". And through this he claims to have "resolved" the Goldbach conjecture and other strange things.
Does he just "claim" or does he give proof? Because if he has the proper system, and he proves his theorems based on his axioms, and does that correctly, that's not much different than e.g. non euclidean geometries.
Or is it impossible to have contrarian views to basic tenets of a human-made axiomatic system such as math without being called a blasphemer?
>If I understand correctly, he goes even farther and claims even really big but finite numbers don't "exist". And through this he claims to have "resolved" the Goldbach conjecture and other strange things.
Does he just "claim" or does he give proof? Because if he has the proper system, and he proves his theorems based on his axioms, and does that correctly, that's not much different than e.g. non euclidean geometries.