<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Irreducible Complexity in Pure Mathematics · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_0411091/</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/math_0411091/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Irreducible Complexity in Pure Mathematics — mentioned by lioeters</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49078237</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:math_0411091:49078237</guid><pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2026 01:47:04 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;From page 12: &amp;gt; Why should we believe in real numbers, if most of them, it turns out,[^15] are maximally unknowable like Ω? [^16] The footnotes: &amp;gt; [^15]: See the chapter entitled The Labyrinth of the Continuum in [Chaitin, 2005] &amp;gt; [^16]: In spite of the fact that most individual real numbers will forever escape us, the notion of an arbitrary real has beautiful mathematical properties and is a concept that helps us to organize and understand the real world. Individual concepts in a theory do not need to have concrete meaning on their own; it is enough if the theory as a whole can be compared…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_0411091/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.HO</category></item></channel></rss>
