Your mathematics hasn’t come over to LW. LW does support LATEX in posts and comments (as I have just demonstrated) but doesn’t pull it in automagically from blogs that use MathJax or whatever.
I like the proof!
But when I read the statement being proved, my immediate thought was “isn’t this just going to be a compactness theorem thing?” and it’s not obvious to me that going via nonstandard analysis really makes it slicker.
iLate reply, but the slicker bit is going in more fully. The appeal of the NSA approach here is axiomatizing it which helps people understand because people already know what numbers are, so ‘inf big’ is much less of a stretch than going the usual crazy inference depth math has.
A few disjointed remarks:
Your mathematics hasn’t come over to LW. LW does support LATEX in posts and comments (as I have just demonstrated) but doesn’t pull it in automagically from blogs that use MathJax or whatever.
I like the proof!
But when I read the statement being proved, my immediate thought was “isn’t this just going to be a compactness theorem thing?” and it’s not obvious to me that going via nonstandard analysis really makes it slicker.
iLate reply, but the slicker bit is going in more fully. The appeal of the NSA approach here is axiomatizing it which helps people understand because people already know what numbers are, so ‘inf big’ is much less of a stretch than going the usual crazy inference depth math has.