You may be correct that it is only an intellectual exercise. How many
lines of LISP code comprises the UD?
 I may have been infomally exposed to LISP in college, but that was
decades ago.

On Jul 20, 5:01 am, Bruno Marchal <> wrote:
> On 19 Jul 2011, at 21:16, meekerdb wrote:
> > On 7/19/2011 11:32 AM, ronaldheld wrote:
> >> Given limited resources and for only 1 program, it does not seem
> >> logical to learn LISP. Are there Windows or DOS executables of the  
> >> UD?
> >> FWIW. I use MAPLE and not Mathematica.
> >>                Ronald
> > Maple is based on LISP.  An executable UD wouldn't be very  
> > interesting.  Since it doesn't halt what would you do with it?  It's  
> > the program itself that is more interesting.
> Absolutely. Even more important is the understanding that the UD, and  
> its mathematical execution is embedded in the first order arithmetical  
> true relation. This is not obvious, nor easy to prove. But it is  
> proved in any accurate proof of Gödel's theorem for arithmetic.
> Also, I would say to Ronald that it is easy to write a code for the UD  
> in any language. I guess it will be a tedious work in a language like  
> Fortran, but that might be a good exercise in programming. But again,  
> you are right: it makes no sense to program a UD. The running is  
> infinite. The only reasons to program it are pedagogical and  
> illustrative.
> Bruno

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to