Some things are very subtle.  Some subtle things have great import.

It goes without saying, that subtle discoveries of import are important to share and discuss.

The Internet has numerous forums where discussions take place: facebook (they get lost and depth is not facilitated), email discussion lists (very good, only typically very limited readership), forums (also very good, but with limited readership and sometimes unprofessional behavior and spam), and (am I leaving any important online discussion area out?) BLOGs (of course, BLOG commenting provides an asymmetry to the discussion on the one hand, but permits the discussion to be organized by the BLOGger acting as discussion moderator)*.

This particular subtle discovery — the current ill-definition of number (that All-finite-natural-numbers is ill-defined, plus some of the initially-apparent consequences of that) — seems important enough to seed into these various online venues (offline venues as well).  This BLOG aims to be a central outpost of the author (me) in whatever disseminations and discussions may ensue, in order to make it easier for disparate discussions (that I discover as relevant, or that I am involved in) to be more easily trackable by whomever is interested in following and/or joining in the dialogue.

In addition to your comments on the subtle thesis in my paper, Limits to Maths, itself, I am also interested in any comments or suggestions regarding accelerating the vetting and validation of the ideas in Limits to Maths, or accelerating the penetration of those ideas into the public and private mind-space and curricula on maths.  Any thoughts or ideas there would also be much, much appreciated!

Thank you.

Reed

reed.burkhart@gmail.com

*Perhaps these is room for an online community of moderated discussions … oh! maybe Wikipedia discussion will be another venue, no?