Hal Ruhl wrote:
>I appreciate the conversation so I will try to build a common reference so
>each additional step to my model can be built on that base and individually
>commented on. As requested these are definitions and terms relevant to my
>model not necessarily to established mathematics.
You should try to make your model part of established mathematics.
Not for the glory, but for making it comprehensible.
>1a) FAS: A symbol string judge. It can judge all possible symbol strings
>either "acceptable" or "not acceptable".
>1b) My FAS contains a single symbol string that is given to be acceptable
>called its axiom.
Let us say.
>1c) The axiom contains all the allowed symbols - the alphabet.
Why not put the fridge in the bottle of milk?
Contain in which sense and why ?
>1d) My FAS contains a set of rules for identifying additional acceptable
>symbol strings with the axiom as the basis.
If you give us a precise FAS, then give it to us. If you are defining
a collection of FAS, then give us an example.
>1e) My FAS contains the rule that any acceptable string contains the
>encoded FAS as a prefix.
It looks like your FAS is a self-delimiting UTM. Is that it?
>I believe my FAS meets the requirements to make it a FAS in the accepted
Not yet. Have you try to implement your FAS, or its computational part
in some programming language?