<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Tools, objects, and chimeras: Connes on the role of hyperreals in mathematics · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1211.0244/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1211.0244/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Tools, objects, and chimeras: Connes on the role of hyperreals in mathematics — mentioned by thraway180306</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16719926</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1211.0244:16719926</guid><pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2018 21:28:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; You don’t need any theory about infinity It&amp;#x27;s not about them, nobody wished them. They came as necessity. &amp;gt; Everything can be done using approximations Approximations are analytical animals. &amp;gt; with bounded error I don&amp;#x27;t know how to bound errors without analysis. &amp;gt; in finite steps. By usage I didn&amp;#x27;t mean occasionally computing. (This is not free of problems. BTW you&amp;#x27;d be horrified to know even finite purely combinatorial mathematics leads to irrational polytopes, ending up with infinities.) But using as a cornerstone of theory that allows for reasoning of epistemic value i.e. one affording…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1211.0244/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.FA</category></item></channel></rss>
