|-|erc
Posts:
1,782
Registered:
1/25/05
|
|
Re: You pedantic ignoramuses
Posted:
Jan 16, 2005 6:25 AM
|
|
-------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------ "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in > >> >> > lets pull a function out of the air, R(x) = Comp(random, x) + 1 mod 10 > >> >> > > >> >> > according to you, this LIARS statement F(x) = ~F(x) is > >> >> > a new random sequence and proves the set of all programs > >> >> > Comp can't spit out any random string at all. > >> >> > Herc > >> >> > >> >> Without knowing (or finding earlier implementations of) Comp(x,y), I > >> >> can't process this statement. I can of course assume that > >> >> Comp(x,y) is machine x running on input y, in which case the correct > >> >> equality > >> >> > >> >> R(x) = (Comp(x,x) + 1) mod 9 > >> >> > >> >> and that is indeed a new sequence, not in the Comp() list. Of > >> >> course, it is not a computable sequence, though it is well-defined. > >> > > >> > Is R computable? > >> > >> If you're asking whether every r in R is computable, the > >> answer is no. Chaitin's Constant is a nice counterexample. > >> > >> Besides, the set of computable reals is of measure 0, > >> since the machines computing said reals can be mapped 1-1 > >> with the integers. Since R is obviously not measure 0, > >> there are uncomputable reals. (Presumably, a real is > >> computable if there exists a TM that can spit out its > >> digits. There are admittedly a few technical issues, such > >> as which part of the tape can be used for digit-spitting, > >> and which for scratchwork. In a pinch, one can use two > >> tapes; TM2 can be mapped to TM by mangling the states and > >> changing the alphabet, so one merely simplifies the problem > >> thereby; the number of computable reals is unchanged.) > > > > > > We'll use a more global defn of computable. Computable means > > computable in some computer system. > > Turing machines can compute anything a modern PC can compute. > It just takes more cycles. :-) > > > > > Say you have an OS on your computer that runs two languages L1 and L2. > > Each language has its own UTM. > > > > In L1, you output a stream of computable numbers, c1, c2, c3... > > (oo many digits isn't as big as it used to be!). > > Erm...yeah. > > > > > The OS pipes the result to a program in L2, this program then outputs > > R(x) = UTM-L1(x,x) + 1 mod 9. > > > > Same effect as munging tapes, and the diag is computable in L2. > > > > (note this goes against my default argument of forming diagonals > > being an invalid op.) > > But forming diagonals *is* an invalid op in some contexts, > as L2 is a finite system. In short, if UTM(x,y) computes a > set of numbers S, then the diagonal number D is not going > to be computable as one gets into the "infinite thread" > problem. > > This is not a problem for mathematicians, though; most > (read: all but measure 0) reals are not computable.
that's a false sense of security thinking you can define functions that wont parse on computer, you boys like to talk big...
but in this case you are safe.
real digit 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2 / / / / 3 / / / 4 / / 5 / 6 7
L1 can send an infinite stream of reals like so. L2 gets the reals and can COMPUTE an antidiag, on a real computer.
> > > > > > >> > >> Of course, there are also computable reals: sqrt(2), > >> pi, and 1/3 are perfectly computable. One can also get > >> into complexity space, asking questions such as how much > >> time and storage might be needed to compute sqrt(2), pi, > >> and 1/3. But this is a detail. > >> > >> And then there's TX_10 = {k/10^n: n >= 0, n, k in J}. > >> This is a perfectly computable and denumerable set, > >> consisting of all finite prefixes (base 10). It is dense, > >> but does not cover R or Q. > >> > > > > If TX_10 was personified it would be dense indeed. > > Does TX_10 cover R? The answer is no. If you wish > to dispute this, show proof otherwise.
TX_10 will mark every position of the number line, drawing it black, but I'll allow you some claim on the terminology, it doesn't cover R.
Herc
|
|