FOM: Grothendieck universes; rampant f.o.m. amateurism

[Martin Davis]

At 06:24 PM 4/15/99 -0400, simpson at math.psu.edu wrote:

>
>Somebody needs to educate the arrogant f.o.m. amateurs.  Who is
>equipped to carry out this task?  I think it's up to the
>f.o.m. professionals.  Let's think about how to do this.  Perhaps the
>FOM list can play a role in this educational project.
>

Well clearly the way to accomplish this laudable educational goal is by
scolding. Perhaps the malefactors can be persuaded to hold out their hands
so their knuckled can be rapped.

We are back to Boolean rings vs Boolean algebras. This thread has had the
following history:

1. McLarty compared the use of large universes in number theory to Harvey's
use of large cardinals.

2. Friedman pointed out that his uses were essential while the others were
eliminable.

3. McLarty admitted this, but claimed that it was nevertheless interesting
that as a matter of practice, thinking in terms of universes is natural and
helpful (at least implicitly agreeing that his comparison was not entirely
appropriate).

WHAT ELSE IS THERE TO TALK ABOUT?

Martin