>Jerry:
>
>> Ouch! Theorem proofs are the hardest keddle of fish to fry in mathematics!
>That's why the vast majority of undergrads who start a maths degree change
>their major after they take a few classes in abstract mathematics... IMO, you
>either get it or you don't. Studying helps you pass a class but doesn't
>make you better at understanding abstract mathematics.

That's a fact. I taught math and science for 10 years at the HS level and 8 years at college level. Kids who 'got it' did so because of their innate ability. They were also easier to teach.


>
>> Betrand Russel took 800 pages to prove that 1+1=2, starting from basic
>> assumptions.
>He must have assumed an algebra of characterics different from 2 because, 1+1=0
>in algebra of characteristics 2! My master thesis involved the creation of a
>non-trivial Jordan algebra of characteristics 2.
>
>Daniel

So you developed a Jordan Algebra on Base 2, eh! Jordan and Von Neuman couldn't make it work as a better explaination for quantum mechanics. Were you trying to create a base 2 polynomial function that could work on computer clusters?

I don't remember all that Russel assumed any more. I got lost around page 30, in all the symoblism. it is not light reading.... :)