David Hilbert

Rust asked, "How is mathematics in Göttingen now that it has been freed of the Jewish influence?" Hilbert replied, "Mathematics in Göttingen? There is really none any more."

You see, mathematics is a purely jewish scam. Kill all jews, and you will kill mathematics.

Mathematics is like Holocaust. Only jews need it.

Yet neither Russell nor Whitehead were Jewish.

>>3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbos_goy

Also, Russel has his http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel's_teapot

Which can be used to criticize mathematics, because math is a religion, with "Infinity Set" being a "God".

http://www.jewishsoftware.net/jewish-american-computer-scientists/hal-abelson.html

If it wasn't for this anti-Semitic and anti-mathematics bollocks, /prog/ would be highly enjoyable board

>>7
YHBT,H

>>7
It's just one guy if you didn't figure it out before, he's probably made dozens of threads by now.

>>1
I bet you think 2 + 3 would not equal 5 (for numbers defined by their usual meanings, but if you insist, I could enumerate Peano's axioms) if there would be no mathematicians? I'll be fine in/with my arithmetical platonic realm, while you can keep beleiving that mathematics is somehow subjective and you could make 2 + 3 equal something else if you think hard enough (without redefining any axioms or the standard notiation for what 1-5 means in base 10).

>>7
It's all the work of a single Muslim troll from Russia who used to troll this board with his retarded ``list processing'' macros, and maybe a few copycats. I know that I have imitated him in the past to lure him out.

>>10
I know that I have imitated him in the past to lure him out.
You did? I did!

>>9
If it wasn't for this anti-Semitic and anti-mathematics bollocks, /prog/ would be highly enjoyable board
At least I tell truth and you can't disprove my arguments.

It's just one guy if you didn't figure it out before, he's probably made dozens of threads by now.
Just this one. And you can't disprove my arguments, because I tell truth.

>>10
Muslim troll from Russia
I'm not trolling, you jewish maggot. And russians should be killed for worhipping this jesus-christ jew and embracing jewish communism.

I bet you think 2 + 3 would not equal 5
In the first place, most mathematicians would say that the interesting or professional part of mathematics is not about 2 x 2 = 4, because 2 x 2 = 4 is a finite and small problem, and so the answer (and the consistency of mathematics at this level) can be ascertained by inspection. As we read in Recursive Aspects of Descriptive Set Theory, by Dick Mansfield and Galen Weitkamp, p. v, "The primary concern of mathematics has been to use the infinite to elucidate this world. ... The primary concern of mathematical logic[20] has been to explore the nature of infinity in order to classify and explain its mathematical applications." So, to elaborate, most mathematicians trust that the consistency of finite structures is ascertainable by inspection. Only infinite structures are problematic: the history of explicit controversy in mathematics is largely a history of notions of the infinitely large and infinitely small.

>>10
who used to troll this board with his retarded ``list processing'' macros
Which ones?

>>13
Symta (the ``in Lisp'' DSL)

>>14
What's wrong with it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habbo_goy

>>15
Bad naming. It's an entirely differently language, not merely a DSL.

>>17
You're a liar anyhow.

>>17
It was started as a DSL.

>>18
It's the first time I post in this thread, fucker.

>>19
Sure, but you don't go around calling trees "seeds", now do you?

>>20
Sure, but you don't go around calling trees "seeds", now do you?
Symta is still a seed.

>>17
Not to mention the fact that, as far as I'm aware, it's not even domain-specific. And no, ``list processing'' is not a specific domain.

>>22
But no language provides good support for list processing. I wanted to fix this. Traditional Lisps provide passable support, but not great, as you have to CONS and CADDR your lists.

>>12
Why would anyone try to rebut your ``arguments'', ``in Lisp'' Muslim self-loathing Russian? They are all infantile straw-men. What of geometry? What of numerical analysis? And you always cower when we get to the subject of abstraction in the first place (what are 'lists', there is no nil in either deserts or tundra, wherever you choose to belong).

And all you did was transform Lisp into a weird, unclear bastardization of some ML language.

Why would anyone try to rebut your ``arguments''
You have no reason, because you can't. And your try will only show that mathematics is a religion. It's like trying to prove existence of "God".

They are all infantile straw-men.
Justify.

They are all infantile straw-men. What of geometry? What of numerical analysis?
Sorry, I'm not a theologician. Can you, please, explain, what you mean by "geometry" and "numerical analysis"? These are pretty loaded words, like "turing machine" or "infinite tape".

And all you did was transform Lisp into a weird, unclear bastardization of some ML language.
I didn't.

man Hilbert's hat was cool as fuck

>>26
If the only cool thing about math is hilbert's hat, then we can live without it.

>>23
But no language provides good support for list processing.
How about Haskell? It has a bunch of functions (map, filter, fold*, intersperse, etc.), list comprehensions, and lists are made using (:) and []. What else do you need?

>>28
Less Haskell for one.

>>28
I need Nial/Refal style list processing, with some elements from Factor and a good macro/quasiquoting facility. Has offers neither.

I prefer writing

// Usage: generate {sentence}
Grammar -> split {|} {sentence    -> (noun_phrase verb_phrase)
                     |noun_phrase -> (Article Noun)
                     |verb_phrase -> (Verb noun_phrase)
                     |Article     -> the a
                     |Noun        -> man ball woman table
                     |Verb        -> hit took saw liked}

generate P:xs?->mapc 'r P; P:rewrites->P,choose,r; P->P
rewrites Category -> Grammar,([@_ {$$Category -> $@RHS} @_]->RHS)


instead of

(defparameter *grammar*
  '((sentence -> (noun-phrase verb-phrase))
    (noun-phrase -> (Article Noun))
    (verb-phrase -> (Verb noun-phrase))
    (Article -> the a)
    (Noun -> man ball woman table)
    (Verb -> hit took saw liked))
  "A grammar for a trivial subset of English.")

(defun generate (phrase)
  "Generate a random sentence or phrase"
  (cond ((listp phrase)
         (mappend #'generate phrase))
        ((rewrites phrase)
         (generate (random-elt (rewrites phrase))))
        (t (list phrase))))

(defun generate-tree (phrase)
  "Generate a random sentence or phrase,
  with a complete parse tree."
  (cond ((listp phrase)
         (mapcar #'generate-tree phrase))
        ((rewrites phrase)
         (cons phrase
               (generate-tree (random-elt (rewrites phrase)))))
        (t (list phrase))))

(defun mappend (fn list)
  "Append the results of calling fn on each element of list.
  Like mapcon, but uses append instead of nconc."
  (apply #'append (mapcar fn list)))

(defun rule-rhs (rule)
  "The right hand side of a rule."
  (rest (rest rule)))

(defun rewrites (category)
  "Return a list of the possible rewrites for this category."
  (rule-rhs (assoc category *grammar*)))

(generate 'S)
(the man saw the table)

>>30
Haskell offers neither.
self fix

>>28
pop
push
set-cdr!

etc.

>>32
set-cdr is costy. it slows down GC and leads to bugs.
better use persistent lists.