How Wide Do All The Possible Computed Digit Sequences Go?
in [Logic]
|
Prev: Question about the complexity of a sentence
Next: Is Borel determinacy true in the recursive reals?
From: |-|ercules on 26 Jun 2010 23:07 "Mike Terry" <news.dead.person.stones(a)darjeeling.plus.com> wrote >> > > Mike Terry countered your objections to step 1 >> > >> > He most certainly did not. >> > >> > Sylvia. >> >> >> I can't quote a long post on my iPhone but >> search "definite index position" and "bona-fide list" >> >> kudos to Mike the first person to Take action to >> end my torture. Could be a sign!!!!! > > Herc, I wouldn't count on that :-) > > All I have done is point out that you have a "bona-fide" list of strings of At any rate Sylvia has ceased her constant accusations of not showing how to list the digit-wide-permutations or having a finite index for such and such a real. I'm sure you were aware of her confusion with such terms as "bona-fide" "definite index position". Herc
From: George Greene on 28 Jun 2010 01:09 On Jun 26, 10:43 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Yes, Ghost in the machine used this argument 20 to 30 times 3 to 4 years ago, > I do follow that. No, you DON'T follow it. IF you followed it then YOU WOULD JUST HAVE USED the list of all finite strings AND NEVER BOTHERED WITH "the list of computable strings", which, UNlike the list of all finite strings, has the VERY UNfortunate (FOR YOU) property that IT IS NOT computable! > But it is possible to make claims about infinite strings using finite strings in > the argument. Then BY ALL MEANS, PLEASE MAKE THOSE claims! Please claim that ..11111111... =1/9 IS CONTAINED IN the list that has ONLY FINITE strings of 1's on it! PLEASE CLAIM that Pi, WHICH IS AN INFINITELY long decimal, IS CONTAINED IN, or ON, or BY, the list of all its FINITE prefixes, even though that list, by definition, has ONLY FINITE strings on it and therefore contains NOTHING "up to infinity"!! PLEASE, CLAIM THAT!
From: George Greene on 28 Jun 2010 01:10 On Jun 26, 11:07 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > At any rate Sylvia has ceased her constant accusations of not showing how to list the digit-wide-permutations If you don't stop saying "permutations", the ghost of a rabid possum is going to haunt your nightmares.
From: |-|ercules on 28 Jun 2010 01:25 "George Greene" <greeneg(a)email.unc.edu> wrote > On Jun 26, 11:07 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> At any rate Sylvia has ceased her constant accusations of not showing how to list the digit-wide-permutations > > If you don't stop saying "permutations", the ghost of a rabid possum > is going to haunt your nightmares. WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! THAT IS COMPLETELY STUPID! You stupid IDIOT! We don't say HAUNT NIGHTMARES! NIGHTMARES are INANIMATE!! Ok they're NOT INANIMATE they are ANIMATED but they are NOT *SENTIENT* in their ANIMATION FOOL! GET IT RIGHT! LEARN TO make your insults CLEAR and SPECULATIVE! A rabbit possum will haunt YOU *IN* your nighties! Herc
From: Joshua Cranmer on 28 Jun 2010 18:21
On 06/28/2010 01:25 AM, |-|ercules wrote: > GET IT RIGHT! LEARN TO make your insults CLEAR and SPECULATIVE! > A rabbit possum will haunt YOU *IN* your nighties! Actually, one of the definitions of "haunt" is (according to my dictionary) "to visit frequently." If you consider your nightmares to be a place for your mind to dwell, it is not hard for a rabid (not rabbit, rabid) possum to haunt them. Learn the English language before calling people out on it, mmmkay? -- Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth |