2025/04/22

Newest at the top

2025-04-22 02:32:11 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:31:35 +0200ezzieyguywuf(~Unknown@user/ezzieyguywuf) ezzieyguywuf
2025-04-22 02:30:34 +0200 <monochrom> But yes the running time of that 27-state machine should tell you quite something about the answer to goldbach's conjecture. I don't know the machine itself so I don't know what it will tell you.
2025-04-22 02:30:06 +0200jacopovalanzano(~jacopoval@cpc151911-cove17-2-0-cust105.3-1.cable.virginm.net) (Quit: Client closed)
2025-04-22 02:29:50 +0200ezzieyguywuf(~Unknown@user/ezzieyguywuf) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:28:10 +0200Guest8(~Guest8@141.11.146.67) (Client Quit)
2025-04-22 02:27:45 +0200Guest8(~Guest8@141.11.146.67)
2025-04-22 02:27:43 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-22 02:27:26 +0200 <monochrom> Because if it is your theory that says there is no difference, then the problem is with you, not with the idea of having theories.
2025-04-22 02:26:46 +0200 <monochrom> Huh, I disagree. In whose theory there is no difference? Because in my theory, there is already a difference, I try very hard to have/use honest theories.
2025-04-22 02:26:08 +0200tt12310978324354(~tt1231@syn-075-185-104-199.res.spectrum.com) tt1231
2025-04-22 02:17:01 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:12:14 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-22 02:12:13 +0200Googulator92(~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-2077-315b-d519-517f-afe7.pool6.digikabel.hu)
2025-04-22 02:11:56 +0200Googulator92(~Googulato@94-21-172-228.pool.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed)
2025-04-22 02:11:55 +0200acidjnk(~acidjnk@p200300d6e71c4f08445cea1ba17aeda3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:05:51 +0200 <TMA> S(6) > 10 ^^ 15 (^^ is tetration)
2025-04-22 02:05:05 +0200 <EvanR> maybe inventing a new annoying form of ultrafinitism
2025-04-22 02:04:43 +0200 <EvanR> which leads me to question if you can "know" what the value 2834528348238485234593452341237645 is
2025-04-22 02:04:34 +0200jespada(~jespada@r190-135-225-29.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy) (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:03:56 +0200foul_owl(~kerry@174-21-146-90.tukw.qwest.net) foul_owl
2025-04-22 02:01:33 +0200 <EvanR> in which case I'm not sure what knowing entails
2025-04-22 02:00:47 +0200 <EvanR> would it be like something with scientific notation, or something that defies notation because it's so big
2025-04-22 02:00:27 +0200 <EvanR> "knowing" what this 27-beaver number is is funny
2025-04-22 02:00:15 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2025-04-22 02:00:05 +0200 <EvanR> also
2025-04-22 01:59:10 +0200 <EvanR> with this clarification of what's what, I think the answer to my question is "no"
2025-04-22 01:58:53 +0200 <TMA> that's for engineers
2025-04-22 01:58:43 +0200 <TMA> mathematics does not concern itself with praxis though :)
2025-04-22 01:57:55 +0200 <TMA> in praxis the difference tends to be immense
2025-04-22 01:57:37 +0200 <TMA> in theory there is no difference between theory and praxis
2025-04-22 01:57:25 +0200 <EvanR> yeah "you know it in theory" is funny
2025-04-22 01:57:06 +0200 <geekosaur> but if it runs for 10^60 years, do you really know the answer from its running time?
2025-04-22 01:56:42 +0200 <TMA> a k-state TM that halts halts in at most BB(k) steps
2025-04-22 01:56:42 +0200 <geekosaur> I know I got the terminology wrong there
2025-04-22 01:56:31 +0200 <EvanR> fininte but possibly unbounded?
2025-04-22 01:55:53 +0200 <geekosaur> what's the difference between "halts" and "halts in a finite but possibly unbounded amount of time"
2025-04-22 01:55:14 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-22 01:54:38 +0200 <TMA> so, you do not know it immediately, but you know it in theory, because only finite many steps are missing
2025-04-22 01:54:00 +0200Guest49(~Guest49@astrolabe.plus.com) (Quit: Client closed)
2025-04-22 01:53:42 +0200 <TMA> you can decide by running it for the 27-beaver steps
2025-04-22 01:52:11 +0200 <EvanR> does this mean if you know the running time of the 27-state busy beaver that you know the answer to goldbach's conjecture
2025-04-22 01:51:06 +0200foul_owl(~kerry@94.156.149.91) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2025-04-22 01:46:23 +0200 <EvanR> There is a 27-state turing machine which halts if and only if goldbach's conjecture is true
2025-04-22 01:45:18 +0200Tuplanolla(~Tuplanoll@91-159-69-59.elisa-laajakaista.fi) (Quit: Leaving.)
2025-04-22 01:42:27 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2025-04-22 01:39:34 +0200weary-traveler(~user@user/user363627) user363627
2025-04-22 01:37:58 +0200merijn(~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn
2025-04-22 01:34:56 +0200peterbecich(~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2025-04-22 01:28:15 +0200peterbecich(~Thunderbi@syn-047-229-123-186.res.spectrum.com) peterbecich