On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> (I assume you mean something like P((P,y))=P(y)).
>>
>> If P(s)=0 (one answer to all questions), then P((P,y))=0 and P(y)=0 for
>> all y.
>
> You're right. But we wouldn't say that the trivial language P = {0,1}*
> "understands" anything. That is a problem with my formal definition of
> "understanding".
>
Then make a definition that fits your claim. As currently stated, it
looks erroneous to me, and I can't see how it's possible to fix that
without explicating your assertion mathematically.
--
Vladimir Nesov
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
