The foundations of real analysis were shaken at the end of the 19th century with the work of [[Richard Dedekind]], who relaid the Archimedean-style groundwork with his own radical concepts. His [[Dedekind cut]]s undercut the assumption of the continuity of the real line, by ''cutting'' at ''gaps'' between points. Mathematicians were worried that his techniques used the dubious [[Axiom of Choice]] and seemingly [[elementary_proof|non-elementary]] methods. However, the unifying ideas of [[Cauchy]], specifically that of the [[Cauchy sequence]] and [[complete metric space|completeness]], helped eliminate doubts and gain acceptance for Dedekind's ideas among real analysts. Dedekind cuts are now viewed as a solid foundation for real analysis, more than Archimedes' ideas ever were.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dedekind-foundations/#FouAna</ref> | The foundations of real analysis were shaken at the end of the 19th century with the work of [[Richard Dedekind]], who relaid the Archimedean-style groundwork with his own radical concepts. His [[Dedekind cut]]s undercut the assumption of the continuity of the real line, by ''cutting'' at ''gaps'' between points. Mathematicians were worried that his techniques used the dubious [[Axiom of Choice]] and seemingly [[elementary_proof|non-elementary]] methods. However, the unifying ideas of [[Cauchy]], specifically that of the [[Cauchy sequence]] and [[complete metric space|completeness]], helped eliminate doubts and gain acceptance for Dedekind's ideas among real analysts. Dedekind cuts are now viewed as a solid foundation for real analysis, more than Archimedes' ideas ever were.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dedekind-foundations/#FouAna</ref> |