Dear Colleagues,

It is my first message to you, and I therefore hesitate a bit to enter such

a long conversation concerning the publication of an important paper that I

have not read. Nevertheless may I make a comment suggesting a new (?)

formulation of the problem we deal with?

Reading again David Hilbert's "No one will drive us from the paradise which

Cantor created for us" let me ask: do those who reject papers in abstract

mathematics know anything about that paradise? I claim they do not, and they

still think that mathematics is about numbers, and that every theorem about

any kind of a mathematical structure is only technical unless that structure

either is a number system or is closely related to a number system. And if

we take ANY "very prestigious" mathematical journal, is there ANY paper

about abstract mathematics in recent years? Please take indeed any such

journal that is also old enough and compare the topics of 2007 with, say,

the topics of 1957.

And exactly because they do not know about Cantor's paradise, no letter will

convince them that solving any problem in lattice theory deserves a

publication. And the same is true not just for lattice theory, but also for

universal algebra in general, and for general topology, and for category

theory.

Writing that letter to AMS is still a good idea, but we should understand

the global problem: the very existence of abstract mathematics is in danger.

It is in danger because it has too many enemies, from "Impact factors" and

"Applications" to pseudo-solutions of the "classical" problems that nobody

can understand (which implies that everything we are doing is trivial since

it can be understood!).

George Janelidze