Skip to content
HomeVideos
AllLongsCategoriesPlaylists
BooksBlogsPodcasts
HistoryListsWatch laterLiked videosFollowing

The videos, books, blogs and podcasts Hacker News keeps recommending, all in one place.

VideosBooksBlogsPodcastsAboutPrivacySettings

Data from Hacker News, HackerTube, HackerBooks, HackerBlogs and Open Library. Credits · Not affiliated with Y Combinator.

HomeVideosBooksBlogsPodcasts
Ctrl K

    What if Current Foundations of Mathematics are Inconsistent? | Vladimir Voevodsky

    Institute for Advanced Study

    3 HN recommenders · recommended in 3 months, 2017–2019

    YouTube

    58:30 · 57K views · Apr 26, 2012

    Vladimir Voevodsky's IAS lecture starts from Godel's second incompleteness theorem to explore whether first-order arithmetic could be inconsistent. It motivates his vision of univalent foundations and computer-checked proofs.

    Recommended as a thought-provoking lecture from a Fields medalist on the foundations of mathematics and formal proof verification.

    Mathematics & Theoretical CSLogic & formal methodsPure mathematics
    1. 34:00
      Math's Fundamental FlawVeritasium31M views • 5 years ago
    2. 42:43
      "Propositions as Types" by Philip WadlerStrange Loop Conference144K views • 11 years ago
    3. 24:14
      The Banach–Tarski ParadoxVsauce49M views • 11 years ago
    4. 57:32
      Five Stages of Accepting Constructive Mathematics - Andrej BauerInstitute for Advanced Study34K views • 10 years ago
    5. 1:14:48
      The Future of Mathematics?Microsoft Research116K views • 7 years ago
    6. 48:55
      Pythagoras' theorem (a) | Math History | NJ WildbergerInsights into Mathematics518K views • 15 years ago
    7. 1:02:34
      MIT Godel Escher Bach Lecture 1jasonofthel33t557K views • 13 years ago
    8. 1:07:10
      Brian Beckman: Don't fear the Monadjasonofthel33t415K views • 13 years ago
    9. 6:07
      How An Infinite Hotel Ran Out Of RoomVeritasium38M views • 5 years ago
    10. 1:00:34
      1. Introduction, Finite Automata, Regular ExpressionsMIT OpenCourseWare628K views • 5 years ago
    11. 59:23
      28c3: The Science of Insecurity28c342K views • 14 years ago
    12. 46:09
      Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? – Richard FeldmanMetosin1.6M views • 7 years ago
    13. 46:46
      Category Theory 1.1: Motivation and PhilosophyBartosz Milewski394K views • 10 years ago
    14. 40:39
      Category Theory in Life - Eugenia ChengLambda World113K views • 9 years ago
    15. 1:02:06
      Real Analysis, Lecture 1: Constructing the Rational NumbersHarveyMuddCollegeEDU613K views • 16 years ago
    16. 1:07:02
      Stanford Lecture: Don Knuth—"A Conjecture That Had To Be True" (2017)Stanford Online30K views • 8 years ago
    17. 1:02:15
      Lambda Calculus - Fundamentals of Lambda Calculus & Functional Programming in JavaScriptFullstack Academy228K views • 9 years ago
    18. 1:30:45
      The Simple Essence of Automatic Differentiation - Conal ElliottMicrosoft Research17K views • 8 years ago
    19. 56:58
      Philip Wadler - Propositions as Types (Lambda Days 2016)Erlang Solutions20K views • 10 years ago
    20. 6:14
      Turing & The Halting Problem - ComputerphileComputerphile919K views • 12 years ago

    3 comments from Hacker News

    1. @IngoBlechschmidNov 2018· in “Mystery Math Whiz and Novelist Advance Permutation Problem”

      > And indeed, this will likely always be the case, as the true purpose of proving a mathematical result is almost never to actually get the boolean true/false output, but to illustrate how to solve the problem in the first place and what methods were helpful for that. As a working mathematician, I wholeheartedly agree with the second part of the quoted sentence! But I think that the first part isn't quite right: The function of proofs to determine truth is extremely important, especially considering that, especially in pure mathematics, we often can't check our results in any other manner (like conducting physical experiments or checking many cases with the computer). Bad experiences with proofs which later turned out to be faulty led Voevodsky to initiate his univalent foundations program (also called homotopy type theory ), where all results should be checked by the computer. (For the particular area he was working on, no existing theorem prover turned out to be sufficient. He made a breakthrough in finding a new foundation to base theorem provers on, which made it possible to formalize results in his area of mathematics not only in principle, but also in practice.) The hope is also that with computer-checked proofs, we can advance to new areas of mathematics which are currently inprenetable to our puny human minds. I'm very much looking forward to this future! You can learn more about Voevodsky's vision in slides of him and in a recorded lecture: [LINK] this video

      RecommendsView on HN
    2. @ukjJul 2019· in “A Programmer’s Regret: Neglecting Math at University”

      Where Hilbert erred was looking for foundations in first-order logic. Univalent foundations are laid on high-order logic. It's the distinction between top-down and bottom-up thinking. If you are into philosophy/epistemology - it's somewhat of an attempt to shift Mathematics from foundationalism towards structuralism. I recommend this video: this video Hilbert's dream of Metamathematics has sort of come true in the form of homoiconicity in programming languages.

      RecommendsView on HN
    3. @Ericson2314Nov 2017· in “How a destructive idea paved the way for modern math”

      Yes we must take saxioms on faith alone. Embrace pluralism and move on. this video by the late great Voedvodvosky is more interesting.

      RecommendsView on HN