Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********
From: |-|erc (H_at_r.c)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Keith Ramsay: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- In reply to: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Next in thread: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Reply: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 13:04:49 +1000
<rupertmccallum@yahoo.com> wrote in message >
> What's the obvious flaw?
>
Omega doesn't converge, it equals oo.
sum (p halts) 2^-|p|
This is adapted from
sum (x has property y) 2^-x
Which always converges, some subset of this sequence,
1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8...
but Omega sums over the MUCH LARGER 1/ (2 ^ size(p))
since size(p) = floor(log(p))
It should be sum (p halts) 2^ -2|p|
then the sum is adjusted to converge. see "Herc defines HOLY GRAIL"
Herc
- Next message: Keith Ramsay: "Re: THIS STATEMENT HAS NO PROOF IN ANY SYSTEM = true or false?"
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Re: Name the thesis: "Formal sentences capture informal ones""
- In reply to: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Next in thread: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Reply: rupertmccallum_at_yahoo.com: "Re: ******** CAN ANYONE HERE DEFINE OMEGA ? ***********"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|