You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

prase comments on Completeness of simulations - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: RolfAndreassen 24 August 2012 10:44PM

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

Comments (31)

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

Comment author: prase 25 August 2012 02:27:15AM *  0 points [-]

The problem that the GLUT-maker faces is that she knows the human's function, h(x,y)=z, and she must create a GLUT function, y=g(x), such that g(x)=h(x,g(x)) for all x. I presume that there is math out there which says what features h(x,y) must have in order for this to be possible, but I don't know it.

What about Exists y: h(x,y) = y? If this holds, take Forall x: g(x) = y and we are done.

Edit: to be more general, we can let y depend on x, which gives Forall x: Exists y(x): h(x,y(x)) = y(x), but that is actually the original statement with the letter y standing in place of the original g. I doubt there is anything more to say about such functions, at least in general.