Re: The hyper-infinity believers friendly question
From: |-|erc (h_at_r.c)
Date: 01/13/05
- Next message: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: Lower bound analysis, question"
- Previous message: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Fast arrays"
- In reply to: george: "Re: The hyper-infinity believers friendly question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 10:27:12 +1000
--------------------------------------s-o-s------------------------------------
"george" <greeneg@cs.unc.edu> wrote in
> Herc> How many digits of a random sequence
>
> Gawd. Illiteracy.
> You don't even MEAN "random" here.
> What you MEANT to say was how many digits of an
> ARBITRARY sequence. My point being that the result
> you are trying show here holds for EVERY sequence,
> INCLUDING sequences that are NOT random.
>
random is a well defined mathematical phenomenum.
the context of random here does not affect the answer, just
as the partcular UTM that you use does not affect the answer,
as long as random, whether coin flips, 2 large primes simulation,
a seeded operation or an external input to the computer produces
*some* infinite string of digits that isn't necessarily a simple
computation, therefore it is arbitrary, just like the selection of UTM
is arbitrary as long as it outputs every computable result there is. *they all do*
arbitrary would be correct and entirely global since there is no
"arbitrary w.r.t. what?" randomness is some process that appears
random w.r.t. the seperate process that inputs it. George likes
everything to have a single meaning for everything even if there is
no ambiguity.
now if you'll excuse me, I have to cycle my 120kg frame 20km in 40 degree heat
to line up with 20 imposiles for the 200th fortnight running while my every
thought goes over the P.A. and public servants and the unemployed imposilies
they serve alike abuse me from all directions, since none of you could be
bothered to examine proof I am Adam.
Herc
- Next message: Colin Andrew Percival: "Re: Lower bound analysis, question"
- Previous message: examachine_at_gmail.com: "Re: Fast arrays"
- In reply to: george: "Re: The hyper-infinity believers friendly question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
