What I did at the time was write a Monte Carlo simulation. I don't know any of those languages well enough to do anything useful with them yet.
I want to use one of the proof assistant languages for some the AGI stuff I am trying to work on, but I am not sure yet which one best suits my needs. I don't know enough about them or my needs to decide yet. I am leaning towards Coq, but if I find something that looks like it plays better with modal logic that might sway me. I have to finish some poorly thought out OAuth2 code before I have enough data sources working that I can turn my attention to how I think the system I am trying to build should reason about those data sources. At that point, I will want to write statements about the data sources, and will need to pick a language in which to write those statements. -- Mark Buda <[email protected]> I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. On Sun, Nov 25, 2018, 11:27 AM Philip Thrift <[email protected] wrote: > > On the other hand, some say you really don't understand something unless > you can write a program that encodes that understanding. > > Can you encode your understanding of the Monte Hall problem in a "logical" > (or proof assistant) language? > > - pt > > On Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 10:11:08 AM UTC-6, Mark Buda wrote: >> >> When presented with the Monty Hall problem, I could not understand it >> without writing a program to help me. I guess that puts me in the good >> company of Paul Erdos, according to Wikipedia... >> -- >> Mark Buda <[email protected]> >> I get my monkeys for nothing and my chimps for free. >> >> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 6:58 PM John Clark <[email protected] wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 5:01 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> *> The best intuition pump to solve the Monte Hall problem is to imagine >>>> that there are 100 doors and Monte opens all the doors except the one you >>>> chose and one other....do you switch?* >>> >>> >>> 3 doors will do. If you follow the switch strategy the only way you >>> would end up losing is if your original guess was correct, and there was >>> only one chance in 3 of that, so if you switch you have 2 chances in 3 of >>> winning. >>> >>> John K Clark >>> >>> >>>> -- >>> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
