Prev: Simple permutation question
Next: INFINITE LIST OF PRIME NUMBERS BY PLACEMENT BY NEW -1TANGENT MATHEMATICS
From: |-|ercules on 4 Jun 2010 01:13
"George Greene" <greeneg(a)email.unc.edu> wrote
> On Jun 3, 7:07 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Otherwise you end up proving that computable reals can't contain
>> some sequence or another when EVERY DIGIT SEQUENCE TO INFINITE
>> LENGTH IS IN THE COMPUTABLE LIST OF REALS.
>
> You are LYING.
> Every digit sequence TO EVERY FINITE length is in the computable list
> of reals.
> THERE ARE PLENTY of reals (most of them, in fact) that differ from
> EVERY
> computable real at SOME FINITE point in the list!

Oh boy, what a laugh! You are going to have to pull a big rabbit out of your hat
to justify that claim.

Which real differs from every computable real at a finite point, and which finite point?
The 1000th digit?
the 1,000,000th digit?

Because every digit sequence is covered up to infinite digits. Or as you put it,
every digit sequence is covered up to every (infinite) finite distance.

Watch George backpeddle that some uncomputable number differs at a *unknown*
finite point in it's expansion, or at an *unspecified* finite point, or *at the end* of the
expansion, or *somewhere* on the expansion a digit is different, but it's definitely
at a finite digit, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, maybe the 4th digit is different to every computable.

Let's work out what finite digit George found that is DIFFERENT to every computable real.

0.0 is computable
0.1 is computable

so it's not the 1st digit.

0.00 is computable
0.01 is computable
0.10 is computable
0.11 is computable

so it's not the second digit that.

So how long until you find this *finite* positioned digit that is different to
every computable real?

Herc

From: Dingo on 4 Jun 2010 01:38
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:13:25 +1000, "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:


>Oh boy, what a laugh! You are going to have to pull a big rabbit out of your hat
>to justify that claim.

You should stick to the voices in your head - thry're more
reliable.....
From: |-|ercules on 4 Jun 2010 01:56
"Dingo" <dingo(a)gmail.com> wrote ...
> On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:13:25 +1000, "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Oh boy, what a laugh! You are going to have to pull a big rabbit out of your hat
>>to justify that claim.
>
> You should stick to the voices in your head - thry're more
> reliable.....

can you trim your stalking and abusing me to aus.tv. sci groups don't want to hear
your derelict comments.

Herc
From: Dingo on 4 Jun 2010 02:06
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:56:14 +1000, "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:

>"Dingo" <dingo(a)gmail.com> wrote ...
>> On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 15:13:25 +1000, "|-|ercules" <radgray123(a)yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Oh boy, what a laugh! You are going to have to pull a big rabbit out of your hat
>>>to justify that claim.
>>
>> You should stick to the voices in your head - thry're more
>> reliable.....
>
>can you trim your stalking and abusing me to aus.tv. sci groups don't want to hear
>your derelict comments.

EVERYONE deserves to know you're a complete whack job.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Prev: Simple permutation question
Next: INFINITE LIST OF PRIME NUMBERS BY PLACEMENT BY NEW -1TANGENT MATHEMATICS