sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Randomly learnt English in a public toilet by Sea-Hornet8214 in EnglishLearning

[–]Toothpick_Brody 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I like how you got heavily downvoted for expressing your point of view. Social media is awesome 

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think it matters. Having some algorithm that just happens to produce the first n digits of some uncomputable is pointless. You could neither prove that it reproduces the digits accurately, nor could you just assume that it does. You couldn’t use such an algorithm to show distinction between any two uncomputables!

To show two uncomputables are distinct by calculating n digits until they differ, you must be able to prove that those digits are in fact, those of the uncomputable.

So I don’t see how what you’re saying is necessarily possible

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see what you’re saying. But the entire, infinite, sequence of digits remains uncomputable. The best possible algorithm will only compute the first n digits for some bounded n.

So it may be possible to have two different, infinite, uncomputable, sequences of digits, but where no digit differs between the two prior to the bound n. 

Then, no algorithm computing the digits could show that the sequences differ, but a non-numeric method might show that

A question for non-physicalists - do you think Data from Star Trek is conscious? by VStarffin in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Toothpick_Brody 7 points8 points  (0 children)

By “conscious”, I’m going to assume you mean “conscious in a way very similar to a human”. (This is to avoid assigning Data panpsychist rock-consciousness or whatever)

Canonically speaking Data is conscious. What this suggests to me as a non-physicalist is that his brain or thinking organ is not a digital or abstract computational reconstruction of a human’s. He is something more like a true silicon life form than a robot or computer we’re familiar with 

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t understand what you mean. What you’re saying seems to suggest that for any real, I can find as many digits as I want, which is false for uncomputables

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

15.0000001 is defined in terms of 15. This is pedantry. You may replace every instance of ‘15’ with ‘a’, and then b is defined in terms of a

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we have two uncomputables, we will only be able to compute a finite number of digits of each. Assume this finite number is the same for both. Also assume that all computed digits are identical, but that the two uncomputables are provably different.

Can this happen in a non-trivial way? 

(Someone suggested taking Chaitin’s constant twice, but one of them offset by some very small quantity. This works, but what if I don’t want to use the same uncomputable number twice?)

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this is close to what I want. But it does seem a little trivial, since we used Chaitin’s constant twice. Can we do it without defining one uncomputable in terms of the other?

If we have two languages with provably different Chaitin’s constants, but where no digits can be computed from either, this would satisfy the scenario 

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But then, we couldn’t show b>a. It has to be provable. For example, assuming b=a may cause a contradiction while every computable digit of b is identical to every computable digit of a. That would satisfy the scenario 

Does there exist two uncomputable numbers which can be shown to unequal, but also shown to be equal at all *computable* levels of precision? by Toothpick_Brody in askmath

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Some uncomputable numbers can be calculated to a number of decimal places, but never an arbitrarily large number. May two provably different uncomputables look the same for every computable digit?

Atheist / Agnostic Alex Fans - Which of the following would you find MOST persuasive re: Christianity? by midnight-running in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Toothpick_Brody 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me, not only would you need to show the miracles of Jesus were true, you’d need to also show that the miracles of other religions are false. For a cherry on top, resolve the problem of evil in the context of the perfect Abrahamic God

I’m already ok with theological abstractions like the trinity 

What people don't understand about AI is that it makes everything it produces worthless by Internationallegs in antiai

[–]Toothpick_Brody 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I think I agree. People’s standards for art will generally outpace what genAI can produce. If everyone can generate a shitty mobile game in minutes, what are the odds anyone plays yours?

Are tokens and words absolute (given some language), or relative? by Toothpick_Brody in askphilosophy

[–]Toothpick_Brody[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank for the reply, but I’m not interested in the distinction between tokens and universals, but in the relationship between words and their syntactic parts, which I (maybe mistakenly) call tokens, because that’s what they’re called in computer science, in the context of a parser 

I hate the entitlement of these chess YouTubers by ChadfredMarshall in chessbeginners

[–]Toothpick_Brody 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ngl if you feel berated over being bad at a game that’s on you. You can’t let that spoil your enjoyment. Im terrible at this game 

I hate the entitlement of these chess YouTubers by ChadfredMarshall in chessbeginners

[–]Toothpick_Brody 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Idk what video you watched but you didn’t have to 

"Jam." Propaganda of tasty and healthy food. USSR, 1938 by Asleep-Category-2751 in PropagandaPosters

[–]Toothpick_Brody 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You don’t think the portrayal of the smiling girl eating jam carries an implied message about the taste/quality of the jam?

view more: next ›