User blog comment:Vel!/Re: Rayo's function/@comment-2033667-20141121133933

@Peng You make some good points, but you're not attacking the primary issue that TE is relying on vague physical concepts to define their number, and as such it is not a valid mathematical object. Their post contains much bragging on how they've defeated Rayo's number, when in fact the system they've come up with can never possibly produce a well-defined number and function.

I'm looking back at the definition of the iota function and I'm seeing a very similar problem: a failed attempt to produce a formal function from a fundamentally informal concept. You can't squeeze clean water out of a turd.