Vladimir_Nesov comments on A model of UDT without proof limits - Less Wrong

13 Post author: cousin_it 20 March 2012 07:41PM

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

Comments (37)

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

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 21 March 2012 02:41:15AM *  2 points [-]

It doesn't prove U()=100, it proves [A()=1 implies U()=100]. Simultaneously having the proof that [A()=1 implies U()=5] allows you to disprove A()=1, which is perfectly fine, since actually A()=2.