[FOM] "Mere" correctness of a proof

[José Manuel Rodriguez Caballero]

>
> Riki Heck wrote:
> One can also get a sense for the importance of explanatoriness by looking
> at
> proofs that are wholly unexplanatory.


The typical example of an unexplanatory proof is Scheffer's proof of the
existence of a non-computable solution of the homogeneous Euler's equation
(fluid mechanics): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02921318

Shnirelman's approach to the same problem is more explanatory:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0312(199712)50:12%3C1261::AID-CPA3%3E3.0.CO;2-6

Notice that Shnirelman considered a torus whereas Scheffer considered the
whole plane. The axiom of choice play no role here.

Kind Regards,
Jose M.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/fom/attachments/20180905/99b114f8/attachment.html>