On 05 Jun 2009, at 14:23, ronaldheld wrote:
>
> Bruno:
> I understand a little better. is there a citition for a version of
> Church Thesis that all algorithm can be written in
> FORTRAN?
The original Church Thesis, (also due to Post, Turing, Markov, Kleene,
and others independently)
is thi
On 04 Jun 2009, at 21:23, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> ...
>>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>> The whole point of logic is to consider the "Peano's axioms" as a
>> mathematical object itself, which is studied mathematically in the
>> usual informal (yet rigorous and typically mathe
Well as FORTRAN is a turing complete language, then you can.
As long as the programming language is universal/turing complete you can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness
Regards,
Quentin
2009/6/5 ronaldheld :
>
> Bruno:
> I understand a little better. is there a citition for a v
Bruno:
I understand a little better. is there a citition for a version of
Church Thesis that all algorithm can be written in
FORTRAN?
Ronald
On Jun 4, 10:49 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Hi Ronald,
>
> On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45, ronaldheld wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bruno:
> > Sin
Bruno Marchal wrote:
> ...
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> The whole point of logic is to consider the "Peano's axioms" as a
> mathematical object itself, which is studied mathematically in the
> usual informal (yet rigorous and typically mathematica) way.
>
> PA, and PA+GOLDBACH are different mathe
On 04 Jun 2009, at 19:28, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Hi Ronald,
>>
>>
>> On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45, ronaldheld wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Bruno:
>>> Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
>>>
>>
>> I was alluding to old, and less old, disputes again program
Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Hi Ronald,
>
>
> On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45, ronaldheld wrote:
>
>
>> Bruno:
>> Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
>>
>
> I was alluding to old, and less old, disputes again programmers, about
> which programming language to prefer.
From my understanding of logic, there is made the distinction between
objects and descriptions of objects.
For example, the relation "is less than" is considered different from
the relation symbol <
So what you said makes sense.
Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Hi Ronald,
>
>
> On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45,
Hi Ronald,
On 02 Jun 2009, at 16:45, ronaldheld wrote:
>
> Bruno:
> Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
I was alluding to old, and less old, disputes again programmers, about
which programming language to prefer.
It is a version of Church Thesis that all alg
Russell:
Maybe you might be interested in gfortran(http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/
GFortran)?
Ronald
On Jun 2, 6:38 pm, russell standish wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:45:22AM -0700, ronaldheld wrote:
>
> > Bruno:
> > Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertai
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:45:22AM -0700, ronaldheld wrote:
>
> Bruno:
>Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
> Ronald
Maybe if he said Fortran IV or Fortran 66, it might have made the
point clearer. I know guys who still pr
Bruno:
Since I program in Fortran, I am uncertain how to interpret things.
Ronald
On May 31, 1:02 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 30 May 2009, at 23:08, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > Has anyone on this list ever heard of this? A theory of reality
>
2009/6/2 Jason Resch :
>
> I think these interviews provide a nice summary of his views:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ak5Lr3qkW0
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mfbUhs2PVY
I can't say I've ever seen a more extreme example of a narcissist.
--
Stathis Papaioannou
--~--~-~--~---
I think these interviews provide a nice summary of his views:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ak5Lr3qkW0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mfbUhs2PVY
I remember seeing an interview with him on TV about a decade ago and
being very interested in his claim to be able to mathematically prove
the exist
Russell, I second (if it is of any worth).
I 'tried' to read the diatribes on the html page and my perseverence ws not
sufficient to stay in he lines. Some concepts seem to be mixed (I did not
say "up") e.g. to identify 'reality' one should get a hold of it and I found
'physical' sketchy (maybe I
Good information, thanks!
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 30 May 2009, at 23:08, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Has anyone on this list ever heard of this? A theory of reality
>> formulated by Christopher Michael Langan?
>>
>> http://www.ctmu.org/Articles/I
On 30 May 2009, at 23:08, rexallen...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Has anyone on this list ever heard of this? A theory of reality
> formulated by Christopher Michael Langan?
>
> http://www.ctmu.org/Articles/IntroCTMU.htm
>
> It sounds a little sketchy at first, though not entirely different
> than som
> Why would someone's IQ rating be a recommendation of anything about
> them?
Well, someone who's 8 feet tall is not necessarily going to be good at
basketball, or even have the other abilities needed to excel at
basketball, BUT I think it seems reasonable to think that it might be
interesting to
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:03:41AM +1000, Kim Jones wrote:
>
> Why would someone's IQ rating be a recommendation of anything about
> them?
>
> People like Langan long ago fell into the "Intelligence Trap". They
> have an exaggerated need to be "right" about everything all the time.
> They
Why would someone's IQ rating be a recommendation of anything about
them?
People like Langan long ago fell into the "Intelligence Trap". They
have an exaggerated need to be "right" about everything all the time.
They are usually unable to think about anything from a perspective
other than
I looked into him about a month or so ago, after he'd posted an
unflattering remark about my work. He might have an IQ of 200, but to
put it bluntly, what he writes is "drivel". It may well have a kernel
of truth, and there may well even be original thought in there, but it
is so voluminous and so
21 matches
Mail list logo
