<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hilbert's Program Then and Now · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_0508572/</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_0508572/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Hilbert's Program Then and Now — mentioned by zozbot234</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21812875</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:math_0508572:21812875</guid><pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 12:38:23 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Not really. Gödel&amp;#x27;s theorem only proved that the specific kind of &amp;quot;mechanization of mathematics&amp;quot; that&amp;#x27;s implied by Hilbert&amp;#x27;s program as originally devised is impossible. The wiki has a nice section on varieties of Hilbert&amp;#x27;s program after Gödel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert%27s_program#Hilbert%27... , citing (Zach, 2006) https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0508572 Of course from a slightly different POV there are plenty of practical implications, since e.g. unsolvability of the Halting problem can be viewed as a close variant of Gödel&amp;#x27;s results.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/math_0508572/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.LO</category></item></channel></rss>
