Re: Set Theory: Should You Believe

Jack Campin - bogus address wrote:
The institutionalization of research
produced many professionals who had no option but to churn out one
paper after another in the mainstream research areas, with virtually
zero support for any significant pursuit of alternative foundations.
All I can say is that this is just plain wrong. Whoever it was that
decided the funding priorities over the last several decades (ever
since the early 1900's) should have had the vision to support and
encourage alternative viewpoints that may have flatly contradicted the
status quo. Why can't these dissenters co-exist with the mainstream
guys and get funding?

They *do* get the same funding as mainstream set theorists, i.e. nothing.

Bull***.

Hugh Woodin, a set theory bagwhan from UC at Berkeley, has sucked down
more than a million dollars in U.S. federal grants in the last 15
years. See the NSF site:

http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/afSearch.do?PILastName=Woodin&PIFirstName=W.+Hugh#results

Set theory is a business, just like any other business. To understand
it, you just have to follow the money.

.

Quantcast