I'd like to let you know that I'm following the serie of your letters.
While I have the background you are covering right now, I still enjoy
I joined the list like two years ago and from that time I've read most
of your key papers. Honestly, it is not the easiest stuff to read
style-wise. You try to precise, define well, etc. yet it cannot really
be compared to the quality of, let us say, Physical Review Letters and
alike articles. In my opinion, that is why it is hard to either agree or
disagree with your thesis.
I can imagine that right now you are tempted to write something along
a\ I just propose to take Church thesis seriously
b\ All I ask you is 'Do you say yes to the doctor?
While valid proposal and question, there is really not much to agree
with/disagree with/critize unless one is willing to undertake long
discussions, clarifications and position adjustments.
Anyway, your papers and letters are really a great source of ideas to
think about and that is exactly what I do. From the day one on the list
I keep myself busy with the question of "Why should I believe in the
Church thesis" (you see, I don't write "Why do I ..."). I've got into
the writing of Bernard Bolzano (I consider his work cruicial in order to
keep an open mind about the Cantor diagonal argument) ..
- and now back to the beginning of my letter -
Bolzano (Cantor), your insights and thinking about alternatives at any
moment make me pretty happy. Thanks!
PS: I'd love to read a book by Bruno Marchal.
Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Hi all,
> I suddenly feel sorry putting too much burden on just one
> correspondent in the list, and I would appreciate if someone else
> could propose answers or any remarks to the exercises.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at