tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.comments2017-06-23T19:59:12.333-04:00RecursivityJeffrey Shallitnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11704125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-46714072160827641092017-06-23T19:59:12.333-04:002017-06-23T19:59:12.333-04:00Don't forget Justin Bourque, either.Don't forget Justin Bourque, either. Jeffrey Shallithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-48788305250618895512017-06-23T19:57:14.385-04:002017-06-23T19:57:14.385-04:00Oh, yeah, that makes sense. A 13-year-old (assumi...Oh, yeah, that makes sense. A 13-year-old (assuming that's how old you were in grade 8, although I suspect you might have been older then) who has not read any research into evolutionary biology and never read a college-level textbook, decides to reject it because it conflicts with his faith. And that makes you smarter than other people. Don't you see how ridiculous you look?<br /><br />"How many Christian acts of terrorism in Canada have you seen in the news in the last 20 years or so?" I guess you never heard of James Kopp? <br /><br />"2) How many MUSLIM acts of terrorism in Canada have you seen in the news?" Very few, actually. You can read about them here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_Canada#Islamist_Extremists . I have no love for Islam, but at least no Canadian Muslims have tried to get me fired the way Christians have.<br /><br />I don't believe the stories in your bible, sorry. The "predictions" it claims are either a matter of crazy interpretation, or people deliberately trying to fulfill prophecies they were told about. Claims that your bible is supported by archaeology are also largely untrue. For example, http://www.yorku.ca/dcarveth/false_testament .<br />Jeffrey Shallithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-7792199492051112782017-06-22T13:35:51.641-04:002017-06-22T13:35:51.641-04:00No I was just smart enough back in grade 8 to figu...No I was just smart enough back in grade 8 to figure out what some Phd's still cannot grasp. But they got their education in the system and they obey that same system which pays them well to tow the line. I was a school teacher later on and was quite disgusted with the mentality formed by today's National Socialists<br /> But I served my country in the RCAF. I want the best for it. But I can still think. Of course in order to get my education I went to a few Universities. Hon. BA, MA, Med, Dip. Th. .... my brain still works- overtime! But I still cannot understand why those who have studied the history of civilization show an obvious bigoted hate for Christians who gave them our basic Canadian values, democracy, who defeated slavery and who still lead the way in caring for the hurting, the addicted, refugees and the like.<br /> BTW: 1)How many Christian acts of terrorism in Canada have you seen in the news in the last 20 years or so? NONE!!!!<br /> 2) How many MUSLIM acts of terrorism in Canada have you seen in the news? XYXYXYXYXY, +/- So we are more dangerous than them? Oh! I think you mean our arguments make you nervous ... somebody might think you are wrong! <br /><br />In your reply tell me about the book which can hold a candle to the Bible when it comes to predictions, the fulfillment of which are verifiable through archeology and in the writings of famous historians, even those who were not Christians and were even known to contest our beliefs. <br />Or, yourself, give me the weather report for the next 14 years. But Joseph gave such a weather forecast to the pharaoh and its fulfillment got him a big job in Egypt. Then along came Moses and his predicting of the first 9 plagues. 1-2-3- √√√√√√√√√- 9 right every time √. So the Israelite slaves were convinced that he was speaking for God. "Put the blood on the lintels of your doors and the angel of death will pass over you," said Moses. (It's not written there, but I bet they asked-"How thick? Moses, how thick?") Anyway more than a million were set free. Every year after that they commemorated Passover and they still do it today.<br />"Oh," the unbeliever says,: That is one more fable in the Bible!" Oh yeah- with one million plus WITNESSES of the event who is going to make up a story to brainwash their entire nation ??? A couple of centuries later they repeat, “My great, great grandfather was there. He told my grandfather about it and he told my Dad. It's true! Thank God ! And I will celebrate Passover with Dad and Grandpa every year -- and with Mom and Grammy to of course. How about you Shimon? You've heard the same story? Yes and you Esther? Oh yeah .. All of you have your hands up!!! Hallelujah!!"<br />Qawiihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11360438643274850912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-46700459935825737262017-06-21T21:36:12.363-04:002017-06-21T21:36:12.363-04:00I am sorry you are so poorly educated, but there a...I am sorry you are so poorly educated, but there are probably community colleges you can attend. Or buy an evolutionary biology textbook.<br /><br />If you make even the slightest effort you can find my writings about Islam. It is, in my opinion, a dangerous delusion like Christianity, and in its militant forms a danger to the world. But Christianity currently poses a greater threat in North America than Islam does (in the world at large, that is not the case).<br /><br /><br />Jeffrey Shallithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-5340617640883992402017-06-21T12:20:44.526-04:002017-06-21T12:20:44.526-04:00I first heard about evolution in grade 8- West sid...I first heard about evolution in grade 8- West side school, New Glasgow, NS. It was introduced as the THEORY of evolution, not as the science thereof. So I considered the "theory." Thousands of mutations, survival of the fit, slow die off of the unfit, A NEVER ENDING PROCESS OVER THE CENTURIES, MILLENNIA, STILL GOING ON TODAY.<br />"So," I said,"I should be surrounded by hundreds of thousands of beings till showing proof of that theory; but where are they? Well I guess I will scrap the theory of evolution."<br />Now that was 65 years ago and in that time period I've only seen one clear example that somebody might offer as proof of inferior human species: <br />- the phd - the pig headed dummy<br />And then there was Hitler and - oh yes- Stalin as well- both strong believers in Darwinian evolution.<br />BTW, you brave souls- WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE THE GUTS TO ATTACK ISLAM? Oh I get it:<br />You have evolved into secular humanism and have become soft accepting liberals (accepting -excepting for Christians)Qawiihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11360438643274850912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-68067965635613774912017-05-29T12:52:07.308-04:002017-05-29T12:52:07.308-04:00Yes, deliberately so. Maybe in the future.Yes, deliberately so. Maybe in the future.Jeffrey Shallithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-29734253239226060122017-05-29T10:39:07.366-04:002017-05-29T10:39:07.366-04:00You said the word is related to your family histor...You said the word is related to your family history, but you did not explain.Jeffohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06989946392105339862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-33540427853276815592017-05-28T21:10:27.256-04:002017-05-28T21:10:27.256-04:00This came up in conversation recently because I ha...This came up in conversation recently because I had just returned from Edmonton (YEG), and my father pointed out that yegg came up fairly often in crossword puzzles.isohedralhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03189502728580537224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-55140764939236825532017-05-28T19:36:42.335-04:002017-05-28T19:36:42.335-04:00I've seen it used in American detective novels...I've seen it used in American detective novels, probably either by Rex Stout or Dashiell Hammet, or both.JimVhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-58797037280337680942017-05-27T20:29:50.095-04:002017-05-27T20:29:50.095-04:00"I Am The Yeggman"
You are the walrus."I Am The Yeggman"<br /><br />You are the walrus.phhhthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04139637988514712501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-20232340648355567672017-05-25T10:22:48.821-04:002017-05-25T10:22:48.821-04:00You are right about Knuth being generous. I sugge...You are right about Knuth being generous. I suggested an addition to the chapter on Song of Solomon in his book <i>3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated.</i> Not only did he work my paragraph-length addition into the text (and thanks to TeX, it still fit on the one page he had allotted for that chapter) &mdash which would have been affirmation enough &mdash he sent me an autographed copy of the book as a thank-you.<br /><br />By the way, the period at the end of the title of the book above is also italicized, because of Knuth's dictum that trailing punctuation should always be included in the mark-up for the sake of beauty. Only once or twice have I encountered a situation where the result would be ambiguous in the wrong way. You are right about Knuth being detail-oriented to a fault.Gene Chasehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15227338101314815542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-39308798761859701522017-05-24T19:58:53.730-04:002017-05-24T19:58:53.730-04:00Dear Unknown:
Your comment is so incoherent, I do...Dear Unknown:<br /><br />Your comment is so incoherent, I don't know what you're trying to say. Try again.Jeffrey Shallithttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12763971505497961430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-5605814402659652052017-05-24T14:30:15.812-04:002017-05-24T14:30:15.812-04:00And voters on the left don't even know the par...And voters on the left don't even know the party in power! Look back at 2008 and 2012.Unknownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03198085897646824425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-42956084927522569882017-05-08T08:03:04.488-04:002017-05-08T08:03:04.488-04:00In response to "philosopher-animal", yes...In response to "philosopher-animal", yes, Hamming's paper does mention evolution, but only in a discussion of whether evolution has created human faculties that can accurately perceive reality (Hamming says: not entirely). But Hamming makes no assertion in his paper that mathematics does not explain evolution. <br /><br />In fact, if mathematics is "unreasonably effective" when explaining evolution, that would mean that it is successful in explaining it. Something that O'Leary has never conceded.Joe Felsensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06359126552631140000noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-90531531899684766632017-05-08T01:21:52.825-04:002017-05-08T01:21:52.825-04:00I have designed a proof of Fermat's last theor...I have designed a proof of Fermat's last theorem using the mathematics of Fermat's time. Read on the internet ' The Simplest proof of Fermat's last theorem,University of Kelaniya'<br />Thank you all.<br />Piyadasa RanawakaPiyadasa Ranawakahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07168590268686413051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-11078419494761915182017-05-07T14:11:20.200-04:002017-05-07T14:11:20.200-04:00Regarding the entries at "Uncommon Descent&qu...Regarding the entries at "Uncommon Descent" I'm sorry but I don't have the stomach to read that kind of drivel, however, some of Hamming's papers and the Dover reprint of his " Numerical Method's ..." are things I have read.<br /><br />On the back of the Dover edition a partial quote reads as follows "..the purpose of computing is insight, not merely numbers."<br /><br />Your statement, "On what rigorous basis can we measure how effective mathematics is.." is like comparing Euler to Gauss, insight with invention vs. insight with invention and rigour. Or, the difference between being literal and literate: the American "rigor" vs Canadian "rigour." The context is an important qualifier.<br /><br />The intent of communication is to effect a change unlike many forms of religion where the intent is to infect. To measure effect here presupposes Chomsky's "the medium is the message" where the form of the conduit enabling communication is more important than the information (or noise) passing through it.<br /><br />The Borgia's, the ups and downs of Confucianism, Mormonism and Scientology are worthy of study and effectively one can be infected or not after absorbing this transmission of information (or noise). As sentient beings, if we can formulate questions then we certainly don't know everything.. or if we can't then we're ignorant.Johnny Waltoshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00276369335615707826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-89669615755136343902017-04-28T07:28:26.086-04:002017-04-28T07:28:26.086-04:00I've long been bothered by that sentiment, the...I've long been bothered by that sentiment, the unreasonable effictiveness claims. Your points about the ambiguity of both words is good, but wasn't my usual problem with it. <br /><br />You mention you think we probably study the stuff that seems interesting and useful, me too, I was called a formalist once on the computational complexity blog for that sentiment I think. <br /><br />But now it has me thinking about Douglas Adams' humorous criticism of the people who look at the world and think it was perfectly made for them, comparing it to a puddle that remarks on how perfectly shaped the hole it occupies is for it specifically — insisting on that perfection even as it evaporates and disappears. <br /><br />The other part that bugs me is, what would a universe that <i>wasn't</i> amenable to mathematical modeling even look like? Cody Reisdorfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16215759746381310609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-17865996392351917392017-04-27T11:49:31.347-04:002017-04-27T11:49:31.347-04:00P versus NP is considered one of the great open pr...P versus NP is considered one of the great open problems of science. This consists in knowing the answer of the following question: Is P equal to NP? This incognita was first mentioned in a letter written by John Nash to the National Security Agency in 1955. Since that date, all efforts to find a proof for this huge problem have failed. <br />I show a solution to that problem as follows:<br />Given a number x and a set S of n positive integers, MINIMUM is the problem of deciding whether x is the minimum of S. We can easily obtain an upper bound of n comparisons: find the minimum in the set and check whether the result is equal to x. Is this the best we can do? Yes, since we can obtain a lower bound of (n - 1) comparisons for the problem of determining the minimum and another obligatory comparison for checking whether that minimum is equal to x. A representation of a set S with n positive integers is a Boolean circuit C, such that C accepts the binary representation of a bit integer i if and only if i is in S. Given a positive integer x and a Boolean circuit C, we define SUCCINCT-MINIMUM as the problem of deciding whether x is the minimum bit integer which accepts C as input. For certain kind of SUCCINCT-MINIMUM instances, the input (x, C) is exponentially more succinct than the cardinality of the set S that represents C. Since we prove that SUCCINCT-MINIMUM is at least as hard as MINIMUM in order to the cardinality of S, then we could not decide every instance of SUCCINCT-MINIMUM in polynomial time. If some instance (x, C) is not in SUCCINCT-MINIMUM, then it would exist a positive integer y such that y < x and C accepts the bit integer y. Since we can evaluate whether C accepts the bit integer y in polynomial time and we have that y is polynomially bounded by x, then we can confirm SUCCINCT-MINIMUM is in coNP. If any single coNP problem cannot be solved in polynomial time, then P is not equal to coNP. Certainly, P = NP implies P = coNP because P is closed under complement, and therefore, we can conclude P is not equal to NP.<br /><br />You could read the details in the link below...<br /><br />https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01509423/documentFrank Vegahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15257641208909866601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-26019034761540239982017-04-25T14:03:19.912-04:002017-04-25T14:03:19.912-04:00Given a number x and a set S of n positive integer...Given a number x and a set S of n positive integers, MINIMUM is the problem of deciding whether x is the minimum of S. We can easily obtain an upper bound of n comparisons: find the minimum in the set and check whether the result is equal to x. Is this the best we can do? Yes, since we can obtain a lower bound of (n - 1) comparisons for the problem of determining the minimum and another obligatory comparison for checking whether that minimum is equal to x. A representation of a set S with n positive integers is a Boolean circuit C, such that C accepts the binary representation of a bit integer i if and only if i is in S. Given a positive integer x and a Boolean circuit C, we define SUCCINCT-MINIMUM as the problem of deciding whether x is the minimum bit integer which accepts C as input. For certain kind of SUCCINCT-MINIMUM instances, the input (x, C) is exponentially more succinct than the cardinality of the set S that represents C. Since we prove that SUCCINCT-MINIMUM is at least as hard as MINIMUM in order to the cardinality of S, then we could not decide every instance of SUCCINCT-MINIMUM in polynomial time. If some instance (x, C) is not in SUCCINCT-MINIMUM, then it would exist a positive integer y such that y < x and C accepts the bit integer y. Since we can evaluate whether C accepts the bit integer y in polynomial time and we have that y is polynomially bounded by x, then we can confirm SUCCINCT-MINIMUM is in coNP. If any single coNP problem cannot be solved in polynomial time, then P is not equal to coNP. Certainly, P = NP implies P = coNP because P is closed under complement, and therefore, we can conclude P is not equal to NP.<br /><br />You could read the details in:<br /><br />http://vixra.org/pdf/1704.0335v1.pdfFrank Vegahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15257641208909866601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-32187192222546573662017-04-21T11:45:36.593-04:002017-04-21T11:45:36.593-04:00One of my personal ideas is that math is thinking,...One of my personal ideas is that math is thinking, thinking is math. When I have three errands to do, at different locations, and take a moment to think what is the best order to do them in, I am doing math. (There is good math and bad math - good and bad thinking - of course.)<br /><br />So yes, to the extent that we understand the universe, it is math that gives us that understanding. The deeper question is, how is thinking/research/design accomplished? Another of my personal ideas is that thinking, design work, and scientific progress are done by a process of evolution (trial and error, with selection criteria and memory). If I am correct, instead of contradicting the biological theory of evolution, our mathematical accomplishments are more evidence that evolution works.JimVhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-54603097729871340352017-04-20T15:23:09.094-04:002017-04-20T15:23:09.094-04:00The point about the subjectivity of the effectiven...The point about the subjectivity of the effectiveness of mathematics is further undermined by the fact that the vast majority of human beings who ever lived never learned anything more advanced than the barest of basics of arithmetic. If at all. <br /><br />Most people either don't have the time to get competent at a high level of mathematics, or are incapable (or so bad at it it would take them most of their life). Mikkel Rumraket Rasmussenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07670550711237457368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-13260675547959079642017-04-19T10:00:23.838-04:002017-04-19T10:00:23.838-04:00Does the article by Hamming actually discuss evolu...Does the article by Hamming actually discuss evolution? If so, I might be willing to give them the slightest tiniest benefit of the doubt. If not, I'd go with dishonest, since they are that too.philosopher-animalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16505629919126188962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-72521680897198677842017-04-18T22:43:50.902-04:002017-04-18T22:43:50.902-04:00Props to Jeffery Shallit, I've never seen a mo...Props to Jeffery Shallit, I've never seen a more level headed, dedicated blogger. You keep doing you. This blog is a terrific example of confirmation bias, placebo effect, and conservatism bias. <br /><br />RonC: "there are people like me electrosensisitivity can feel all crystals, all kinds of electromagnetic" Straight text book example, you're using your own perceived feelings as evidence to yourself that healing works. While you likely feel certain ways when holding rocks, the confirmation bias and placebo effect hand-in-hand can produce rather convincing results. So please conduct a double-blind experiment and report the results. Please, if you can prove what you're feeling comes from the rock, by all means do it! That will be truly ground-breaking science! <br /><br />Like Lucy Asian said about those french studies on crystal healing "the facts of the experiments were that most people DID indeed feel crystal effects. With real AND fake crystals." That's the key issue here, if you believe in crystal healing, you mind has the capacity to create convincing emotions/effects. No one is saying you aren't feeling anything, because you likely are... however the SOURCE of these feelings most likely lays in your mind, not the crystal in your hand. <br />Jon Emmickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02556349365056026375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-10481971066706616662017-04-18T15:26:06.612-04:002017-04-18T15:26:06.612-04:00I liked this rebuttal article by D. Abbott in an I...I liked this rebuttal article by D. Abbott in an IEEE paper (PDF) <br /><br />"The Reasonable Ineffectiveness of Mathematics"<br /><br />http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/publications/PIE_abbott2013.pdfJimVhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10198704789965278981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20067416.post-37672133035901166842017-04-18T14:12:47.968-04:002017-04-18T14:12:47.968-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.scientioushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01527095085270278014noreply@blogger.com