Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem
From: Mitch Harris (harrisq_at_tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de)
Date: 08/01/04
- Next message: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Previous message: George Greene: "Re: Standard Model of N means standard well-ordering ?"
- In reply to: Peter Olcott: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Next in thread: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 1 Aug 2004 19:18:41 GMT
Peter Olcott <olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>"Eray Ozkural exa" <erayo@bilkent.edu.tr> wrote in message
>>
>> What is the probability that all of the computer scientists who
>> responded to you have a poorer understanding of the problem than
>> yourself? (Hint: assume that there are 10 people who responded to you
>> independently)
>
>I will answer that question with another question.
>What is the probability that the ad verecundiam fallacy is not an
>error of reasoning?
>http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AdVerecundiam
in mathematics, very high. So that would make the answer to Eray's
question...?
Mitch
- Next message: Kent Paul Dolan: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Previous message: George Greene: "Re: Standard Model of N means standard well-ordering ?"
- In reply to: Peter Olcott: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Next in thread: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
Loading