3 ms·

Well, I am glad you are finding my commentary helpful but I am still no closer to understanding the reasons for your arbitrary choices. Why is it a “recursion

by ukj 5y ago

Well, I am glad you are finding my commentary helpful but I am still no closer to understanding the reasons for your arbitrary choices. Why is it a “recursion conjecture”? Why isn’t it a “Corecursion conjecture”?

nmaleki 5y ago
https://recursioncorecursion.is https://recursioncorecursion.is does not have the same marketing effect that https://recursion.is https://recursion.is does :P Additionally, I admit that I was not aware of corecursion prior to this conversation. I have been referring to the two as the same concept this entire time. I do not have access to all that is knowable. I did not go to the same universities/* you did that taught this concept. To further illustrate this, "corecursion" has About 18,100 results on Google. "Recursion" has About 20,900,000 results. All YouTube videos on the subject have sub-1k views; since your comment, I have watched many of these videos. I am prepared to say that corecursion is an integral part to the conjecture; just as important as recursion. Lastly, it is my understanding that they are, in a way, each other. Ask yourself how you define both and then ask yourself what is the major difference between the two. Are you certain that your definition of both is absolute? Could it be that one could stem from the other in some case? I'll give you a hint, I am being entirely rhetorical. They do stem from one another. Where this stemming-process has *no origin*[3] in an *infinite* system - neither idea can be seen as the "top-level" idea. They are both crucial. This conclusion may bother you, and I will release a more rigorous argument soon. Corecursion will be a/the topic of one/all of my future videos. PS: This conversation allowed me to think I understand how type theory integrates with mathematics, to my own personal plague of not internally using concepts I don't think I fully understand [3] https://notes.recursion.is/Philosophy/Origin https://notes.recursion.is/Philosophy/Origin

by ukj 5y ago

nmaleki 5y ago

https://recursioncorecursion.is https://recursioncorecursion.is does not have the same marketing effect that https://recursion.is https://recursion.is does :P Additionally, I admit that I was not aware of corecursion prior to this conversation. I have been referring to the two as the same concept this entire time. I do not have access to all that is knowable. I did not go to the same universities/* you did that taught this concept. To further illustrate this, "corecursion" has About 18,100 results on Google. "Recursion" has About 20,900,000 results. All YouTube videos on the subject have sub-1k views; since your comment, I have watched many of these videos. I am prepared to say that corecursion is an integral part to the conjecture; just as important as recursion. Lastly, it is my understanding that they are, in a way, each other. Ask yourself how you define both and then ask yourself what is the major difference between the two. Are you certain that your definition of both is absolute? Could it be that one could stem from the other in some case? I'll give you a hint, I am being entirely rhetorical. They do stem from one another. Where this stemming-process has *no origin*[3] in an *infinite* system - neither idea can be seen as the "top-level" idea. They are both crucial. This conclusion may bother you, and I will release a more rigorous argument soon. Corecursion will be a/the topic of one/all of my future videos. PS: This conversation allowed me to think I understand how type theory integrates with mathematics, to my own personal plague of not internally using concepts I don't think I fully understand [3] https://notes.recursion.is/Philosophy/Origin https://notes.recursion.is/Philosophy/Origin