Re: Cantor's diagonal proof wrong?

From: Torkel Franzen (torkel_at_sm.luth.se)
Date: 11/16/04 

Date: 16 Nov 2004 11:26:58 +0100

Paul Leyland <paul@leyland.vispa.com> writes:

> It is most certainly not yet proven, but there is (IMO) a very good
> chance that physics needs integers, number theory, combinatorial
> analysis, statistics, set theory, group theory and various other
> branches of discrete mathematics but does not need real numbers for
> anything other than computational convenience.

Solomon Feferman believes that most of the mathematics involved in
physical theories can be formalized in a weak type theory W that is
conservative over PA. But of course the possibility of formalization
in weak theories is one thing, and what is "needed" in a practical
sense another.