Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- From: "HERC777" <herc777@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 13 May 2005 15:46:21 -0700
AnEcAd1d2[ new & cew & d1eD & d2eD & (d1=/=d2)
-> L[n,n]=d1
& L[c,c]=d2
& L[n,c]=d1
& L[c,n]=d2
] ]
to me that says, for all digits, L[n,n] = that digit.
e.g. L[2,2] = 0
and L[2,2] = 1
and L[2,2] = 2
that's why I had L[n,n]=d1 as a condition, not anything implied.
(An, Ec, Ad1, d2 e {0..9}, d1=/=d2, L[n,n]=d1, L[c,c]=d2)
L[n,c] = d1 and L[c,n] = d2
c=/=n seems optional too, since it would contradict d1=/=d2 if they
were equal, however the defn is symmetrical at the moment, so I will
add c>n anyway so there are 9 'rightwood' squares for each diag-digit.
I need this quality later when the 'blind shuffle' operation is
demonstrated.
Herc
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- From: george
- Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- References:
- Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- From: george
- Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- Prev by Date: UCLA Logic Colloquium, May 20
- Next by Date: Re: Question on Chaitin
- Previous by thread: Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- Next by thread: Re: A Simple Non-Diagonalisable List
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|