 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Logic Forum » Characterization of a Programming Language (Base of... |
|
Page 1 of 3 Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Charlie-Boo... |
 Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 1:45 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Theorem: For any set P and 2-place function s if there is a number N
such that for all x the value of P(x) equals P(s(N,x)) then for any
r.e. set Q there is an M such that for all x, Q(x) equals P(s(M,x)).
Define a 2-place relation R as being a Base of Computing if for every
r.e. set P there is an N such that P(x) = R(N,x) for all x. For
example, let R(x,y) be “Turing Machine x halts on input y.” Then R is
a Base of Computing. For each r.e. set P there is a Turing Machine N
that halts on just the elements of that set.
When is a given R a Base of Computing, without reference to Turing
Machines? The first paragraph above is the answer. R is of the form P
(s(a,b)) for some set P and function s. R CONTAINS ITSELF by virtue
of a number N that defines P within P: P(s(N,x)) = P(x) for all x.
Godel proved that the relation “Wff x with input y is provable.”
contains itself. Turing proved “Turing Machine x halts on input y.”
contains itself.
The theorem above generalizes these two observations.
This allows us to construct minimal Bases of Computing by devising P
and s that meet the premise of the theorem.
C-B |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Aatu Koskensilta... |
| Posted: Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:51 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Charlie-Boo <shymathguy at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
[quote:53f5eb9a83]Define a 2-place relation R as being a Base of Computing if for every
r.e. set P there is an N such that P(x) = R(N,x) for all x.
[/quote:53f5eb9a83]
How do you propose to derive the parametrisation theorem from this? In
any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:17 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 16, 9:51 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
Define a 2-place relation R as being a Base of Computing if for every
r.e. set P there is an N such that P(x) = R(N,x) for all x.
How do you propose to derive the parametrisation theorem from this?
[/quote]
Good question. How about if we add, "There is a recursive function
sub such that for all x,y,z R(sub(x,y),z)=R(x,y)."?
[Sorry I just looked at this now - only 1 reply.]
[quote]In any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
[/quote]
It didn't seem that sad.
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| flowbase... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 12:17 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 16, 9:51 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
Define a 2-place relation R as being a Base of Computing if for every
r.e. set P there is an N such that P(x) = R(N,x) for all x.
How do you propose to derive the parametrisation theorem from this?
Good question. How about if we add, "There is a recursive function
sub such that for all x,y,z R(sub(x,y),z)=R(x,y)."?
[Sorry I just looked at this now - only 1 reply.]
In any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
It didn't seem that sad.
C-B
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
[/quote]
P!.n..lw[ 00000450: b0 6d 76 ee 52 d1 58 db 07 c3 fe 10 d6 84 c0
8b .mv.R.X......... 00000460: 51 5b 17 cb 30 b7 27 e5 96 8f 60 6c ae
dc 9c b7 Q[..0.'...`l. ...d |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 5:48 pm, flowbase <marty.musa... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 12:17 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 16, 9:51 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
Define a 2-place relation R as being a Base of Computing if for every
r.e. set P there is an N such that P(x) = R(N,x) for all x.
How do you propose to derive the parametrisation theorem from this?
Good question. How about if we add, "There is a recursive function
sub such that for all x,y,z R(sub(x,y),z)=R(x,y)."?
[Sorry I just looked at this now - only 1 reply.]
In any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
It didn't seem that sad.
C-B
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
P!.n..lw[ 00000450: b0 6d 76 ee 52 d1 58 db 07 c3 fe 10 d6 84 c0
8b .mv.R.X......... 00000460: 51 5b 17 cb 30 b7 27 e5 96 8f 60 6c ae
dc 9c b7 Q[..0.'...`l. ...d- Hide quoted text -
[/quote]
To those who understand, no explanation is necessary. To those who do
not understand, fuck 'em.
C-B
> - Show quoted text - |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:32 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 1:05 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
On Sep 16, 9:51 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[/quote]
What happened to the discussion on proving s-m-n?
BTW There can be no general proof of s-m-n as it depends on the syntax
and semantics of the given system (base), and each is distinct
otherwise it would be the same system. That's why Godel and Turing
each proved it for their system only.
[quote]
In any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
It didn't seem that sad.
It moved me to tears.
[/quote]
Funny you refer to "it" when nothing has been defined. Googling
"acceptable indexing" produces nothing but false finds and wikipedia
explicitly says there's no such thing (below.)
But you have all the confidence in the world in "it"? How can that
be? What is this "it" you are referring to, anyway? Your ego,
perhaps?
If you have something intelligent to say, then say it. I won't
respond to ill-defined and unfounded statements or silly sarcasm
anymore.
[quote]Did you notice, when you looked up "acceptable
indexing", any hint of connection to your notion of a "base of
computing",
[/quote]
Search results
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Content pagesMultimediaHelp and Project pagesEverythingAdvanced
There were no results matching the query.
You may create the page ""acceptable indexing"", but consider checking
the search results below to see whether it is already cove
Search results
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Content pagesMultimediaHelp and Project pagesEverythingAdvancedResults
1 - 20 of 3,781 for acceptable indexing
You may create the page "Acceptable indexing", but consider checking
the search results below to see whether it is already covered.
Daru-Journal of Faculty of Pharmacy (section Indexing)
Indexing : Daru is indexed and abstracted in the following
bibliographical database s: Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS), http://library.
.... 4 KB (514 words) - 16:52, 10 May 2009
Scrabble (section Acceptable words)
unless they also appear as acceptable entries: "Jack" is a proper
noun, but the ... External links - : com/en/adults/index. html
Scrabble website ... 54 KB (8,420 words) - 02:40, 21 October 2009
Depth of field (section Acceptable sharpness)
of field (DOF) is the portion of a scene that appears acceptably sharp
in the image. ... large white index mark, the focus is set to that
distance. ... 75 KB (11,649 words) - 13:43, 29 October 2009
Overfishing (section Acceptable levels)
Overfishing occurs when fishing activities reduce fish stocks below an
acceptable ... External links: org/sof/sofia/index_en. htm SOFIA
report ... 33 KB (4,804 words) - 02:49, 21 October 2009
Placebo-controlled study (section Indexing)
Indexing ... a significant level of placebo response can also prove to
be an index of how much the treatment has been directed at a wrong
target. ... 30 KB (4,498 words) - 20:34, 14 October 2009
Grid (spatial index) (section Grid-based spatial indexing)
be assigned unique identifiers and used for spatial indexing
purposes. ... may be considered a perfectly acceptable example of a
spatial index ... 6 KB (878 words) - 11:12, 21 July 2009
Entity-attribute-value model
system designer may consider it an acceptable alternative to
creating ... with the standard indexing by class ID/attribute ID, DBMS
optimizers ... 51 KB (7,994 words) - 03:36, 21 October 2009
Spark plug (section Indexing spark plugs)
specified acceptable range, to ensure longer life between plug
changes. ... A matter of some debate is the "indexing" of plugs
upon ... 32 KB (5,174 words) - 01:23, 29 October 2009
Dave Strickler (section Compilation and indexing)
1924–1995: The Complete Index, regarded as a major reference work by
researchers ... Compilation and indexing: Strickler's main source
of ... 4 KB (623 words) - 23:59, 1 July 2009
IUPAC nomenclature of inorganic chemistry 2005 (section List of
acceptable names)
Bridging index: Where there are more than two centres that are bridged
a bridging index is added as a subscript. ... List of acceptable
names ... 37 KB (4,821 words) - 10:04, 8 October 2009
Enterprise content management (section Components for subject indexing
of captured information)
Components for subject indexing of captured information ...
acceptability with unchangeable storage, protection against
manipulation and erasure, etc. ... 57 KB (7,504 words) - 17:17, 28
October 2009
Acceptable.TV
Acceptable. TV was a television program from the makers of Channel 101
that first aired on VH1 on March 23, 2007. ... com/news/index. ... 6
KB (786 words) - 02:37, 25 October 2009
Acceptable use policy
An acceptable use policy (AUP; also sometimes acceptable usage policy
or Fair Use ... uk/aup/index statement of the philosophy of the
sponsor ... 12 KB (1,927 words) - 20:08, 25 October 2009
Geo targeting
continue to debate about when cloaking might be acceptable and when it
is not" ... References : com/help/us/ysearch/indexing/indexing-14. ...
7 KB (997 words) - 22:47, 15 August 2009
Tourism carrying capacity (section Limits of Acceptable Change)
Fundamentally, acceptable conditions are a matter of human
judgment ... local tolerance for tourism as described by Doxey’s Index
of irritation. ... 8 KB (1,221 words) - 14:34, 28 October 2009
Drilling fluid (section Control corrosion (in acceptable level))
Control corrosion (in acceptable level): Drill-string and casing in
continuous contact with drilling fluid may ... Further Reading : com/
index. php? ... 23 KB (3,576 words) - 19:43, 6 October 2009
Die Kassierer
Shortly after the indexing the cover was changed, so that the LP was
acceptable for sale in Germany again. Further attempts to label
other ... 5 KB (695 words) - 13:10, 18 October 2009
Motorola 68020
a 68020/25 with a 68882/33 was perfectly acceptable and quite
common. ... The new addressing modes added scaled indexing and another
level of ... 6 KB (854 words) - 10:32, 17 September 2009
Web crawler
This does not seem acceptable. ... The crawler was integrated with the
indexing process, because text parsing was done for full-text
indexing ... 41 KB (6,138 words) - 18:04, 29 October 2009
Branch table
the input data to ensure it is acceptable; transform ing the data
into ... htm Example code generated for array indexing if structure
size is ... 12 KB (1,713 words) - 17:57, 28 October 2009
[quote]some subtle similarity?
[/quote]
Yes, Wikipedia doesn't say anything about either.
[quote]Did it perhaps whet your appetite
for more, prod you into finding out for yourself what's known about
this stuff?
[/quote]
Well, none of my 300 books on Logic, Theory of Computation, Recursion
Theory, Incompleteness in Logic and Theoretical Computer Science
contains my theorem, so I guess they are lagging a little behind.
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 1:40 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 1, 1:05 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Did it perhaps whet your appetite for more, prod you into finding out
for yourself what's known about this stuff?
Well, none of my 300 books on Logic, Theory of Computation, Recursion
Theory, Incompleteness in Logic and Theoretical Computer Science
contains my theorem, so I guess they are lagging a little behind.
None of these 300 books have anything to say about acceptable indexings
either? If you don't have one already, get a copy of Rogers's _Theory of
Recursive Functions and Effective Computability_ and look up "acceptable
indexing" in the index. The role of the parametrisation theorem will
emerge from a general theorem about indexings you'll find.
[/quote]
I'm looking at it now. What page is my theorem on?
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 1:40 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
On Nov 1, 1:05 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Did it perhaps whet your appetite for more, prod you into finding out
for yourself what's known about this stuff?
Well, none of my 300 books on Logic, Theory of Computation, Recursion
Theory, Incompleteness in Logic and Theoretical Computer Science
contains my theorem, so I guess they are lagging a little behind.
None of these 300 books have anything to say about acceptable indexings
either? If you don't have one already, get a copy of Rogers's _Theory of
Recursive Functions and Effective Computability_ and look up "acceptable
indexing" in the index. The role of the parametrisation theorem will
emerge from a general theorem about indexings you'll find.
[/quote]
I asked, “When is a given R a Base of Computing, without reference to
Turing
Machines?” and point out that my definition of P does not.
The definition of acceptable indexing given by Rogers is (pg 41,
2-10), “There exists a recursive function f . . .”, which does make
reference to the Turing Machines.
The point is to define a Base of Computing (Roger calls an Acceptable
Indexing) self-contained (no reference to another Base of Computing)
in as simple a manner as possible, as I describe in the last
paragraph. Rogers does not.
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 3:10 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
The point is to define a Base of Computing (Roger calls an Acceptable
Indexing) self-contained (no reference to another Base of Computing)
in as simple a manner as possible, as I describe in the last
paragraph. Rogers does not.
Did you by any chance notice a little result relating acceptable
indexings to the enumeration and parametrisation theorems? Did you ever
actually /read/ (in the ordinary sense of the word) any of the 300 books
you say you have?
[/quote]
Yeah, we already went through that. So what?
BTW Rogers' Condition 1 implies condition 2. The inverse of a
recursive map is recursive. (Return the smallest number that maps to
it.)
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Aatu Koskensilta... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Charlie-Boo <shymathguy at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
[quote]On Sep 16, 9:51 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
In any case, look up "acceptable indexing" and weep.
It didn't seem that sad.
[/quote]
It moved me to tears. Did you notice, when you looked up "acceptable
indexing", any hint of connection to your notion of a "base of
computing", some subtle similarity? Did it perhaps whet your appetite
for more, prod you into finding out for yourself what's known about
this stuff?
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Aatu Koskensilta... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 1:40 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Charlie-Boo <shymathguy at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
[quote]On Nov 1, 1:05 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Did it perhaps whet your appetite for more, prod you into finding out
for yourself what's known about this stuff?
Well, none of my 300 books on Logic, Theory of Computation, Recursion
Theory, Incompleteness in Logic and Theoretical Computer Science
contains my theorem, so I guess they are lagging a little behind.
[/quote]
None of these 300 books have anything to say about acceptable indexings
either? If you don't have one already, get a copy of Rogers's _Theory of
Recursive Functions and Effective Computability_ and look up "acceptable
indexing" in the index. The role of the parametrisation theorem will
emerge from a general theorem about indexings you'll find.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Aatu Koskensilta... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 3:10 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Charlie-Boo <shymathguy at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
[quote]The point is to define a Base of Computing (Roger calls an Acceptable
Indexing) self-contained (no reference to another Base of Computing)
in as simple a manner as possible, as I describe in the last
paragraph. Rogers does not.
[/quote]
Did you by any chance notice a little result relating acceptable
indexings to the enumeration and parametrisation theorems? Did you ever
actually /read/ (in the ordinary sense of the word) any of the 300 books
you say you have?
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 3:47 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 1, 3:10 pm, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
The point is to define a Base of Computing (Roger calls an Acceptable
Indexing) self-contained (no reference to another Base of Computing)
in as simple a manner as possible, as I describe in the last
paragraph. Rogers does not.
Did you by any chance notice a little result relating acceptable
indexings to the enumeration and parametrisation theorems? Did you ever
actually /read/ (in the ordinary sense of the word) any of the 300 books
you say you have?
Yeah, we already went through that. So what?
BTW Rogers' Condition 1 implies condition 2. The inverse of a
recursive map is recursive. (Return the smallest number that maps to
it.)
C-B
[/quote]
For the record, Rogers is saying essentially nothing about bases of
computing in general. He defines (pg. 41), "The standard Godel
numbers of 1.8 provide such a numbering [note: no s-m-n guaranteed in
the definition of "numbering"]; call it pi0." Then he says IF there
are recursive functions that map between the representations of the
same set using pi0 and your numbering, then your numbering meets s-m-
n.
But that works simply by definition of s-m-n being a recursive
substitution function and the fact that composition is closed under
recursive functions: the composition of recursive functions is
recursive. s-m-n is really saying that "substitution is recursive" -
the map from wff number A and number B to wff number C of A with B
substituted for its free variables is recursive". So if you add
another layer by changing the "syntax" used to represent the same set
via the same "algorithm", and saying that change is recursive (map
between representations), then the new substitution function is also
recursive.
That would work regardless of the nature of the functions being
enumerated (represented.) It is just saying that the composition of
any recursive substitution function and a recursive map between a
known Base of Computing (Godel's wffs of Logic) is recursive but that
is true just by the statement that they are both recursive functions.
Make the rest of the words anything that makes mathematical sense and
it is still a true statement.
The argument is so trivial that it does not relate to the notion of
defining a Base of Computing.
It is only begging the question. A recursive function over Godel's
system satisfies s-m-n if/since Godel's system does.
The problem (as I stated) is to define the simplest possible
conditions for a Base of Computing (self contained.)
Thanks for the discussion.
Buh-Bye
C-B
[quote]
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:54 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 8:32 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
The argument is so trivial that it does not relate to the notion of
defining a Base of Computing.
The sad fact is that you clearly don't understand the result alluded to
[/quote]
I gave a detailed explanation. You gave none.
None of what you have said indicates or requires any understanding of
Rogers' material. You only say to look at it. Well, I did. And I
wrote my analysis - in detail and repeatedly explaining with different
words. You only erased it and made unsubstantiated claims. If it is
wrong, then refute it. Show how I am wrong when I say that his
argument applies to ANY numbering of ANY functions, not just an
acceptable numbering of recursive functions.
What is your "solid basis" for stating that I don't understand it?
You say "clearly" - so what is the basis? If you have no basis, you
meet the psychological definition of being psychotic.
It IS truly sad, Atta. You once actually posted technical points that
contributed to discussions. What went wrong? How did you get so
lost?
You have stooped to bogus references that you yourself cannot defend
other than by being cavalier and sarcastic.
C-B
[quote]characterising acceptable indexings. In another message you suggested
it's pointless to debate "psychopaths and abusive people". Taking this
kind advice to heart, I now beat a hasty retreat, once again leaving you
to your unperturbed, free to carry on with your lofty undertaking of
axiomatising all of computability theory and churning out an endless
stream of exciting theorems of CBL. Good luck!
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Charlie-Boo... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:00 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 10:29 am, Aatu Koskensilta <aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi> wrote:
[quote]Charlie-Boo <shymath... at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
Show how I am wrong when I say that his argument applies to ANY
numbering of ANY functions, not just an acceptable numbering of
recursive functions.
Well, you could just try to understand the result at issue. It doesn't
merely establish that the enumeration theorem and the parametrisation
theorems hold for acceptable indexings.
[/quote]
But "acceptable indexing" is his term, not existing and with no
established significance. What is the point or value of referring to
something that someone just made up with no justification?
So you say "There exist things that it does other than these quasi-
theorems." but again give no basis, a continuation of your psychosis.
And you offer no refutation of my results, no matter how detailed and
eplicit I make them.
[quote]It IS truly sad, Atta. You once actually posted technical points that
contributed to discussions. What went wrong? How did you get so
lost?
Who knows? I agree it's very sad when people in news debates stoop to
the level of comparing others to terrorists.
[/quote]
Because you are both psychotic?
C-B
[quote]--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensi... at (no spam) uta.fi)
"Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:57 am
|
|