[ineedasername]

Maybe this will help people, maybe just make things worse, but for what it's worth, here's my $0.02: I read the first half (with an early tangent to wikipedia for "intuitionist math") feeling profoundly uncomfortable with the entire premise.

Then at the halfway mark, I realized that intuitionist math feels a lot like David Hume's approach to metaphysics and epistemology, which always felt right to me.

Intuitionist math still makes me feel uncomfortable, but now at least it also seems consistent with a framework of thought that doesn't. I'm not sure I've ever been quite so profoundly intellectually ambivalent.

[slowmovintarget]

The first smell for me was the name "intuitionist". The concepts involved make a lot of sense to me, though. This kind of number system follows the rule of "TANSTAAFL" (Robert Heinlein's "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch"), namely that you cannot have zero-cost infinities as real numbers require.

As a side note, if this notion pans out... welcome back Free Will.

[naasking]

Intuitionism should be familiar: it's effectively the logic underlying most programming. It's basically what allowed theorem provers like Coq to extract a runnable OCaml program from a logic proof.

[peterburkimsher]

I watched Conway's 6th lecture about Free Will today, and was thinking about the consequences of his theorem. As I understand, he proved that Free Will is mutually exclusive with determinism: "Everything happens for a reason."

Then I started thinking about time and causality. Does time really exist? Time dilation really exists, after all. What if there were an elementary particle that has no Free Will? Would that make it eternal?

I feel that eternity and infinity are deeply connected, but I'm not mathematically smart enough to prove it. If you'd like to discuss further though, please send me an email!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgvkhgE1Cps&list=PLhsb6tmzSp...