Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?
From: r.e.s. (r.s_at_ZZmindspring.com)
Date: 11/03/04
- Next message: tchow_at_lsa.umich.edu: "Re: P vs NP craziness & Diaby was already refuted... in 1988"
- Previous message: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- In reply to: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Next in thread: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Reply: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:53:00 GMT
"William Elliot" wrote ...
> [r.e.s. wrote ...]
> "William Elliot" wrote ...
>> r.e.s. wrote:
>>
>>> Combinators K,S can be characterised as satisfying
>>> K a b = a
>>> S a b c = a c (b c)
>>> for arbitrary terms a,b,c.
-snip-
>> For more information, here's an article I found on the web ...
>> http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/jeroen/article/combinat/
>
> Didn't download propertly.
> Did he give \f.fKSK or something else for the
> one-combinator base?
He -- the author is Jeroen Fokker at Utrecht University --
lists four that were already in the literature, including
\f.fKSK, and derives several others, including \f.fS(\xyz.x).
In all of these, S is as I've characterised it (i.e.,
\abc.ac(bc)).
>> > Are you sure S isn't \abc.ac(cb) ?
>> > As I recall, isn't my S and K a base?
>
>> I don't know about yours, but the S and K that I
>> describe above form a standard two-combinator basis.
>
> Can you show tau = \xy.yx combination of your S and K?
It's easy to confirm (S(K(S(SKK)))K) works; or, see the
derivation at http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Combinator
> S(SK)ab = SKb(ba) = K(ba)(bab) = ba with my S and K.
Yes, but that's far from establishing your "S",K as a basis.
Denote your \abc.ac(cb) by $, and retain S for \abc.ac(bc).
Following the procedure outlined at the cited page, $ can
be expressed in terms of S,K alone. Can you show, on the
other hand, that S can be expressed in terms of $,K alone?
--r.e.s.
- Next message: tchow_at_lsa.umich.edu: "Re: P vs NP craziness & Diaby was already refuted... in 1988"
- Previous message: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- In reply to: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Next in thread: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Reply: William Elliot: "Re: single-combinator basis with direct algebraic characterisation?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|