Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN

From: Will Twentyman (wtwentyman_at_read.my.sig)
Date: 01/12/05


Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:40:22 -0500


|-|erc wrote:

>>>They aren't things. Its UNKNOWN.
>>
>>Having an unknown output doesn't make it not a thing.
>
> there is no such thing as unknown output. that's what it means

If something is unknowable, then it is unknown. The fact that it is
unknowable doesn't mean it doesn't have a value.

>>>the result ISNT KNOWN. YOU DONT KNOW.
>>
>>And that doesn't bother me.
>
> you're half way there.
>
> if you try to assign it to an_unknown then obviously you have some concern.

I assign the value UNKNOWN to AN_UNKNOWN and go to sleep. The fact that
its value is UNKNOWN is not a problem (in my mind).

>>>the program may halt IN THE FUTURE.
>>>it has no HALT *value*.
>>
>>Time is not a factor in the value of halt(1000). Why do you think it is?
>
> BUT IT IS! Stop taking determinism for granted, we are at its limits.
>
> What is the value of SE?
>
> SE = 1 iff our sun explodes, =1 otherwise

I'll assume you meant =0 otherwise.

Halt generally refers to a TM. Why change the context to real events?

>>>Things that are unknown are not objects.
>>
>>Why do you think that? Perhaps I just have a different notion the
>>possible state of things than you.
>
> That is why you fail

Ah, you consider your understanding the standard. Perhaps that is why
you face so many people who disagree with you. Have you considered
declaring all of humanity beneath you and simply ignoring our existence?
  Attempts at enlightening us seems to cause you far more frustration
than it does us.

-- 
Will Twentyman
email: wtwentyman at copper dot net


Relevant Pages

  • Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
    ... >>Having an unknown output doesn't make it not a thing. ... > That is why you fail ... you consider your understanding the standard. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
    ... >>Having an unknown output doesn't make it not a thing. ... > That is why you fail ... you consider your understanding the standard. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
    ... "Will Twentyman" wrote in ... ... >> there is no such thing as unknown output. ... then it is unknown. ... because it is a scientifically correct model to alter the defn of a TM slightly, ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
    ... "Will Twentyman" wrote in ... ... >> there is no such thing as unknown output. ... then it is unknown. ... because it is a scientifically correct model to alter the defn of a TM slightly, ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Difference between AN UNKNOWN and UNKNOWN
    ... "Will Twentyman" wrote in ... ... >> there is no such thing as unknown output. ... then it is unknown. ... because it is a scientifically correct model to alter the defn of a TM slightly, ...
    (sci.logic)