L’auteur cherche à montrer cru’un appel à l’évidence intuitive pour fonder les mathématiques n’est ni rejetable, ni évitable,. Cet appel à l’intuition nécessite un fondement subjectif des mathématiques à côté du fondement objectif.

The Krüppel‐like factors (KLFs) comprise a family of evolutionarily conserved zinc finger transcription factors that regulate numerous biological processes including proliferation, differentiation, development and apoptosis. KLF4 and KLF5 are two closely related members of this family and are both highly expressed in epithelial tissues. In the intestinal epithelium, KLF4 is expressed in terminally differentiated epithelial cells at the villus borders of the mucosa and inhibits cell growth, while KLF5 is expressed in proliferating epithelial cells at the base of the intestinal (...) crypts and promotes cell growth. KLF4 and KLF5 respond to a myriad of external stress stimuli and are likely involved in restoring cellular homeostasis following exposure to stressors. Confirming their importance in maintaining tissue integrity, KLF4 and KLF5 are both dysregulated in various types of cancer. Here we review the recent advances in defining the physiological and pathobiological roles of KLF4 and KLF5, focusing on their functions in the intestinal epithelium. BioEssays 29:549–557, 2007. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

Professor P. Bernays has kindly drawn my attention to the fact that the assignment of Godel numbers to formulas described on page 295 of volume I of this Journal, is not correct. Under this assignment, different formulas may obtain the same Godel number and therefore the argument given on page 296 under (i) is not cogent. The correct assignment would give, for the formula considered as an example, the Godel number 28. 320. 514. 782 The correction to be made on (...) page 294, L 20 is obvious. (shrink)

Professor P. Bernays has kindly drawn my attention to the tact that the assignment of Gödel numbers to formulas described on page 295 of volume I of this Journal, is not correct. Under this assignment, different formulas may obtain the same Gödel number and therefore the argument given on page 296 under (i) is not cogent. The correct assignment would give, for the formula considered as an example, the Gödel number 23. 329. 514. 732 The correction to be made on (...) page 294, l. 20 is obvious. (shrink)

Is time travel just a confusing plot device deployed by science fiction authors and Hollywood filmmakers to amaze and amuse? Or might empirical data prompt a scientific hypothesis of time travel? Structured on a fascinating dialogue involving  ...