/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11578359
his point is that solving general algebraic equations is an important, well defined, mathematical problem in itself, regardless of its applicability on other fields (physics in particular).

actually, it is so important that the actual construction of the complex numbers is irrelevant. set theory now provides a useful set of tools to create other sets and objects (if sometimes a bit artificially). but just because you can is not a reason. in that sense 'set theory' is not 'foundational'. not everything that can be built out of it (as the OP opinion could be interpreted) is interesting or even math just for that. perhaps not everything even should be allowed.