Zalamea is a gentleman. But is this enough? Is this what we actually want: a sheaf of romantic vagaries where all math fields become the expressions of the sublime? Sheaves everywhere=tender-heart ontological hypothesization?
I used to be his number one fan but he is not any better to be honest.
-
-
I have not read much of him beyond a few more papers. Speaking of which, I do remember an interesting (if typically underdeveloped) paper by Zalamea about probability calculus as first philosophy. at least more interesting than bland and muddled valorisations of 'contingency'
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.