> I would not reply if not for the delicious irony the georoge cantor was a schizophrenic lunatic who died poor and homeless.
Do the mental problems and drug addiction of a brilliant musician detract from his or her music? Do you yell "madman" at a painting by van Gogh?
> Unlike you I welcome the death of mathematicians and mathematics as we know it
Even you, with the most pedestrian definition of what is "useful", must surely acknowledge that a lot of mathematics is immensely useful. Yet you wish for its death. You have nothing to replace it with. You sound like Trump and his non-existent healthcare "plans". You're hell-bent on destroying something simply because you cannot grasp it.
> No we are not. The post was about the value of notation and my thread was about the refutation of notation as useless and programming as a better alternative to it.
Yes, and in a sub-thread of the post you've made it clear that you doubt the usefulness of mathematics. So now we are having a sub-discussion about that. Yet you've still to contribute anything of value. On several occasions have I and others invited you to comment on very concrete mathematical constructions. You evade those invitations. I can only surmise that that is because you do not understand the questions you are being asked, or are unable to provide an alternative to the current standard mathematics. That standard mathematics is done in a somewhat formal language built around the very notation that this thread is about.
Do the mental problems and drug addiction of a brilliant musician detract from his or her music? Do you yell "madman" at a painting by van Gogh?
> Unlike you I welcome the death of mathematicians and mathematics as we know it
Even you, with the most pedestrian definition of what is "useful", must surely acknowledge that a lot of mathematics is immensely useful. Yet you wish for its death. You have nothing to replace it with. You sound like Trump and his non-existent healthcare "plans". You're hell-bent on destroying something simply because you cannot grasp it.
> No we are not. The post was about the value of notation and my thread was about the refutation of notation as useless and programming as a better alternative to it.
Yes, and in a sub-thread of the post you've made it clear that you doubt the usefulness of mathematics. So now we are having a sub-discussion about that. Yet you've still to contribute anything of value. On several occasions have I and others invited you to comment on very concrete mathematical constructions. You evade those invitations. I can only surmise that that is because you do not understand the questions you are being asked, or are unable to provide an alternative to the current standard mathematics. That standard mathematics is done in a somewhat formal language built around the very notation that this thread is about.