Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?
From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_sirius.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 01/09/05
- Next message: Vo Gon: "Re: WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, December 2004"
- Previous message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: sci.math logic"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Next in thread: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Reply: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 05:00:11 GMT
In sci.math, |-|erc
<h@r.c>
wrote
on Sun, 9 Jan 2005 13:06:27 +1000
<34bld8F3n70r8U1@individual.net>:
>> >
>> > define a TM
>> > prove it is impossible
>> > define a number using impossible TM
>>
>> The TM for computing Chaitin's Constant is a mutation of
>> the TM for computing the halting problem.
>>
>> [spitsnip]
>>
>
> so you prove the halting value of some programs is unknown
> then you assign that to a variable, an unknown so to speak?
I'm not proving much of anything here. I'm simply stating
a result.
But, have it your way. Assume H is a machine with the following
characteristics.
[1] It always halts.
[2] If k = Enc1<m> concat ',' concat Enc2<i>, where m is
a machine descriptor in some UTM formalism and i is
a tape descriptor, and Enc1<> and Enc2<> are computable
mappings into H's alphabet (sans ','), then H will
write a 0 or 1 into the first cell of k
(the rest of the tape will be munged).
[3] H will write 0 if m(i) will not halt, 1 if m(i) will.
If I've done this right, I can then construct another
machine W from H. W does the following.
[a] It looks for the comma, then replaces anything following
with Enc2<beforecomma ',' aftercomma> , then moves the head
back to the start of its input.
[b] It copies H. That is to say, the states of H are isomorphic
to a proper subset of W's states, and the transitions of H
are isomorphic to a proper subset of W's transitions.
[c] If the head is sitting over a 0, it halts and announces success.
If the head is sitting over a 1, it loops.
W of course has a machine descriptor w. We can construct
k = Enc1<w> ',' Enc2<w>, and feed it to W.
Case 1: W(k) halts. This means that machine(w) on input w
does not halt. But machine(w) = W.
Case 2: W(k) loops. This means that machine(w) on input w
halts. But machine(w) = W.
Therefore H cannot exist.
In this machinery Chaitin's Omega can be construed as that number
such that the n'th bit is 1 if machine n halts on input Enc2<n>,
and 0 if machine n does not halt on input Enc2<n>. Very well-defined,
but not all that computable.
>
> X = of Halt(777)
> an unknown of the unknown. <gag>
>
> Y = "there is a god"
> what is the value of Y?
Y = false. But that's more properly addressed in talk.atheism. :-P
>
> Herc
>
-- #191, ewill3@earthlink.net It's still legal to go .sigless.
- Next message: Vo Gon: "Re: WINNERS! Usenet Kook Awards, December 2004"
- Previous message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: sci.math logic"
- In reply to: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Next in thread: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Reply: |-|erc: "Re: OPPOSITE OF all coin sequences are computable to infinite length ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|