I've found a couple more versions of the original paradox. There's another named after Richard. The two apparently are classified as definability paradoxes, as opposed to set theoretical ones like those of Cantor or Russel.
Will need to follow up on it tomorrow.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
i've long been of the opinion that in the phylogeny of mathematics, first there is topology, then geometry, then sets. numbers are a a child of sets. geometry is based on surfaces and graphs, ie topology. sets are based on geometric relations, oppositions, adjacency, dimension (scale).
definitions probably fit within the topology/geometry section of the map, since they are about discovering the relations between concepts and things, which are basically vectors and scalars.