This is dumb. Godel showed that there are non-standard models of arithmetic. This means that there are distinct, non-isomorphic sets of objects which satisfy the axioms of Peano arithmetic. There's no talk of formal systems in his proof.
Turing applied Godel's work to Turing machines and showed that there are non-recursive functions. No talk of formal systems here.
I have no idea why you're mentioning Cohen, since his most famous work had to do with showing that there are models in which the Continuum hypothesis fails and models in which the Axiom of Choice fails. Not related to formal systems at all. Just Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.
All of this is tangential. Assuming a generous reading of "formal system" as "formal logic, your alleged "limitations" to formal systems come down to a simple corollary of Godel's completeness theorem: Given a fixed set of sentences S, there is a proof of A from S iff A is true in every model of S.
There was an episode of Scientific American Frontier where a test subject was blindfolded and asked to interpret symbols (braille) by touch. The sight-area of the brain took on the task of interpreting the symbols (since it's used often for reading, etc') only after a few days without sight.
You're right, but she had to give up the ability to see to do that. Her visual cortex adapted to not recieving any visual stimulus by making her tactile sensation stronger through a lot of braille exercises. Now, the obvious issue is that a blind person's visual cortex would be doing the person some other work. Wiping that away could be bad news, especially since it's not clear that the visual cortex only adapts by allowing stronger tactile experience. Or even that the brain would re-arrange the visual cortex and not some other region(s).
I wonder how much documentation/community support CodeZoo is going to get. The reason things like the CPAN and CTAN work as well as they do is because of the enormous contributions from places like comp.text.tex, the TUG, and comp.lang.perl.*
There's enough code on the C?AN to make finding anything impossible without help.
I didn't say anything about saving the world. You're right, Times Square and Las Vegas are both enormous wastes of resources. But neither you nor I are in a position to do anything about them. But we are in a position to do something about the things in our homes, including shutting off electronic appliances when they're not in use.
I'm surprised they let you out of school, hippy. Your leaps in logic astound.
Uh, pi is the limit of a convergent sequence. One can easily derive identities with which to calculate pi to any accuracy desired. A simple one is:
pi^2 / 6 = Sum_{n=1}^{oo} 1/(n^2)
It is straightforward to prove this identity. (Just take Fourier coefficients on the function f(x) = x on the interval -pi to pi).
If you're looking for an experiment with 2 billion significant digits of accuracy, you're never going to find one. That's physically impossible, for several hundred reasons.
Because we are in a position to do something about shutting off those wasteful computers. Fucking hippy. Using Las Vegas and Times Square as an excuse to do nothing is weak.
Btw, getting rid of copyrights will also destroy every open source project as some greedy company would be able to easily rip off the hard work of the developers. They come in once the project is mature, make it proprietary, close the source and sell it at a profit tied to something cool that sells. The small developer has then no legal recourse since there is no copyright law at all to protect their creation.
That's really stupid. In order for a company to turn an open sourced project into a closed one, they'd have to find and destroy every copy of the project's source code. Otherwise, they would face competition from the OSS community -- and would likely lose.
A good flash-carding program would be very helpful. I can't offer any specific advice, but there was an AskSlashdot question here a few weeks ago about software for helping one learn languages. That's where I found out about the one I'm using.
You've got a lot of advice here telling you that you can sue for libel, threaten them with the RICO act, claim a denial of the first amendment (if you're at a state school), and so on. I would personally suggest going to the IT department and talking to their director about this. Just a friendly chat -- there's no need to threaten anyone. Tell him why you want to use BitTorrent.
Of course, if your IT dude has any sense, he'll reply that the linux distribution/patch/whatever you're after is also available via http/ftp. And he has a point about that. Of course, you might argue that you're putting an undue burden on the linux/patch/whatever distributor's servers, but if the IT dude has any sense, he'll tell you that the bandwidth you'd be giving away to help them isn't really yours to give. It's for every student to use, not just you.
Don't be whiny. This is a non-issue unless you're trying to pirate.
Likely, I'm one of either a figment of your imagination or a real person independent of your belief in that.
Godel's incompleteness theorem does no work in the philosophy of mind. There are several Godel-skeptical-like arguments in the philosophy of mind and language (Wittgenstein's private language argument, what I was alluding to before, is one of these). But they are not related in content or even structure.
"Unweaving the rainbow" by Richard Dawkins
Read it. It was crap. In any event, you obviously don't understand the Camus quotation if you think it's condescending. (Hint: He's advocating neither religion nor slavery, just relating his personal experience of living in the absurd)
"I'm not really here" by Tim Allen. Wouldn't know, as I don't follow up on Tim Allen scholarship.;-)
"Godel, Escher, Bach" by D.R.Hofstader Read it. Now that was a steaming pile of shit. You might as well tell me to read Godel or Penrose for their philosophy of mind.
Remember, you are in no position to tell me anything about my mental states. They're mine -- you have no access to them. You are in no position to tell me anything about labotomy[sic] victim's mental states. Or schizophrenics', for that matter. All you call tell me about is your own. So all you can do is tell me about your own, if that.
Racists hate people because they belong to a particular ethnic group. A person can't really decide what skin color to be born with. Modulo socialization, a racist can decide not to be one.
One is much worse than the other, even if neither are good.
Slashdot Mirror
This is dumb. Godel showed that there are non-standard models of arithmetic. This means that there are distinct, non-isomorphic sets of objects which satisfy the axioms of Peano arithmetic. There's no talk of formal systems in his proof.
Turing applied Godel's work to Turing machines and showed that there are non-recursive functions. No talk of formal systems here.
I have no idea why you're mentioning Cohen, since his most famous work had to do with showing that there are models in which the Continuum hypothesis fails and models in which the Axiom of Choice fails. Not related to formal systems at all. Just Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.
All of this is tangential. Assuming a generous reading of "formal system" as "formal logic, your alleged "limitations" to formal systems come down to a simple corollary of Godel's completeness theorem: Given a fixed set of sentences S, there is a proof of A from S iff A is true in every model of S.
There was an episode of Scientific American Frontier where a test subject was blindfolded and asked to interpret symbols (braille) by touch. The sight-area of the brain took on the task of interpreting the symbols (since it's used often for reading, etc') only after a few days without sight.
You're right, but she had to give up the ability to see to do that. Her visual cortex adapted to not recieving any visual stimulus by making her tactile sensation stronger through a lot of braille exercises. Now, the obvious issue is that a blind person's visual cortex would be doing the person some other work. Wiping that away could be bad news, especially since it's not clear that the visual cortex only adapts by allowing stronger tactile experience. Or even that the brain would re-arrange the visual cortex and not some other region(s).
I wonder how much documentation/community support CodeZoo is going to get. The reason things like the CPAN and CTAN work as well as they do is because of the enormous contributions from places like comp.text.tex, the TUG, and comp.lang.perl.*
There's enough code on the C?AN to make finding anything impossible without help.
Richard Feynman wrote about taking a patent out on a nuclear rocket design in "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman."
Can you just outline how, as a species, we know that the formula you give above is in accorance with reality, given we can't measure it to find out?
Uh, we can use this thing called logic. Happily, it tells us that when a = b and b = c, then a = c. We use that principle to derive formulas.
I didn't say anything about saving the world. You're right, Times Square and Las Vegas are both enormous wastes of resources. But neither you nor I are in a position to do anything about them. But we are in a position to do something about the things in our homes, including shutting off electronic appliances when they're not in use.
I'm surprised they let you out of school, hippy. Your leaps in logic astound.
what's up cockgoblin
Uh, pi is the limit of a convergent sequence. One can easily derive identities with which to calculate pi to any accuracy desired. A simple one is:
pi^2 / 6 = Sum_{n=1}^{oo} 1/(n^2)
It is straightforward to prove this identity. (Just take Fourier coefficients on the function f(x) = x on the interval -pi to pi).
If you're looking for an experiment with 2 billion significant digits of accuracy, you're never going to find one. That's physically impossible, for several hundred reasons.
Because we are in a position to do something about shutting off those wasteful computers. Fucking hippy. Using Las Vegas and Times Square as an excuse to do nothing is weak.
Btw, getting rid of copyrights will also destroy every open source project as some greedy company would be able to easily rip off the hard work of the developers. They come in once the project is mature, make it proprietary, close the source and sell it at a profit tied to something cool that sells. The small developer has then no legal recourse since there is no copyright law at all to protect their creation.
That's really stupid. In order for a company to turn an open sourced project into a closed one, they'd have to find and destroy every copy of the project's source code. Otherwise, they would face competition from the OSS community -- and would likely lose.
Don't be idiotic. Pick up a book on information theory.
I'm pretty sure it's possible to install on those machines with XPostFacto.
If the checksums don't match, you'll want to overwrite the old one with the new or you'll get false e-mail alerts after even trivial updates.
A good flash-carding program would be very helpful. I can't offer any specific advice, but there was an AskSlashdot question here a few weeks ago about software for helping one learn languages. That's where I found out about the one I'm using.
Uh, not really. TFA said that he was sentenced to 18 months in prison and 10 hours of community service.
Uh, the BATFE?
It's the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives now.
It was a joke. Get over yourselves.
People are just going to call it "The chemical compound that cannot be named in less than 60,000 characters." Whoops.
You've got a lot of advice here telling you that you can sue for libel, threaten them with the RICO act, claim a denial of the first amendment (if you're at a state school), and so on. I would personally suggest going to the IT department and talking to their director about this. Just a friendly chat -- there's no need to threaten anyone. Tell him why you want to use BitTorrent.
Of course, if your IT dude has any sense, he'll reply that the linux distribution/patch/whatever you're after is also available via http/ftp. And he has a point about that. Of course, you might argue that you're putting an undue burden on the linux/patch/whatever distributor's servers, but if the IT dude has any sense, he'll tell you that the bandwidth you'd be giving away to help them isn't really yours to give. It's for every student to use, not just you.
Don't be whiny. This is a non-issue unless you're trying to pirate.
open the door, get on the floor, everybody clone the dinosaur
You might call it giving credit, but I call it giving blame. Quite unfunny.
Was the offendor coerced into making a public apology and serving as a scary example to others? You bet he was.
Uh, no, he wasn't.
Likely, I'm one of either a figment of your imagination or a real person independent of your belief in that.
Godel's incompleteness theorem does no work in the philosophy of mind. There are several Godel-skeptical-like arguments in the philosophy of mind and language (Wittgenstein's private language argument, what I was alluding to before, is one of these). But they are not related in content or even structure.
"Unweaving the rainbow" by Richard Dawkins
;-)
Read it. It was crap. In any event, you obviously don't understand the Camus quotation if you think it's condescending. (Hint: He's advocating neither religion nor slavery, just relating his personal experience of living in the absurd)
"I'm not really here" by Tim Allen.
Wouldn't know, as I don't follow up on Tim Allen scholarship.
"Godel, Escher, Bach" by D.R.Hofstader
Read it. Now that was a steaming pile of shit. You might as well tell me to read Godel or Penrose for their philosophy of mind.
Remember, you are in no position to tell me anything about my mental states. They're mine -- you have no access to them. You are in no position to tell me anything about labotomy[sic] victim's mental states. Or schizophrenics', for that matter. All you call tell me about is your own. So all you can do is tell me about your own, if that.
Uh, no.
Racists hate people because they belong to a particular ethnic group. A person can't really decide what skin color to be born with. Modulo socialization, a racist can decide not to be one.
One is much worse than the other, even if neither are good.
Everytime someone posts anonymously, God kills a puppy.