prase comments on Gödel and Bayes: quick question - Less Wrong

1 Post author: hairyfigment 14 April 2011 06:12AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (36)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: prase 14 April 2011 06:38:40PM *  1 point [-]

So all we need is an algorithm - given any real number or formula representing a real number, determine whether that number is an integer. But there is no such algorithm. It isn't so much a difficulty in simply encoding or defining the word "integer", it is a difficulty in producing an operational or algorithmic definition of "integer".

Yes, this was approximately what I meant by "encoding the word integer". Somehow it didn't occur to me that it may be difficult, or even impossible, to test real numbers for integerness. Still, I am not sure if I understand. A concrete example of a uniquely defined real number whose integerness is unknown would help.

Comment author: Perplexed 15 April 2011 01:16:33AM 1 point [-]

I think you misunderstood. I said there exists no algorithm such that for all formulas it can decide whether the formula represents an integer. Which is equivalent to saying that forall algorithms there exists a formula which can't be decided.

In other words, the way this game is played, first you specify the algorithm and then I supply the formula that breaks it.

Comment author: prase 15 April 2011 09:03:28AM 0 points [-]

I understood that the algorithm valid for all formulae had to be produced in advance, but still I found it strange that it doesn't exist. Further thinking about it it doesn't seem so strange after all.