>>11447473>I'd be surprised if there is anyone on this board who could even come up with a valid argument against him.His entire program would require generations of mathematicians to implement.
The effectiveness of analysis makes it very unlikely that any analyist, engineer or physicist would not outright ignore these ideas, even if the rest of mathematics would want to implement them.
The desirability of implementing these mathematics, *before* there is any demonstration that they can effectively reproduce things like ODEs and PDEs and give sufficient room to investigate these objects, seems questionable.
The idea to base mathematical constructions on knowledge about the physical universe seems by itself retarded. Even IF the universe were finite and discrete infinite mathematics is still able to describe it with reasonable effectiveness.
Far more interesting would be if there was an effort by him to computerize his mathematics. It seems *exactly* what this kind of mathematics would be useful for.
