3 ms·
> This, if the program did fail all that's been proven is that that particular delta-epsilon function, the defeatEpsilon here, doesn't work. It would prove tha
by eriksank 14y ago
> This, if the program did fail all that's been proven is that that particular delta-epsilon function, the defeatEpsilon here, doesn't work.
It would prove that such epsilon exists. That counterexample should be enough to reject the claim itself.
- rtkwe 14y agoIt only disproves that the particular delta-epsilon function works though. That just proves that the proof writer wasn't clever enough to find a working d-e, not that there isn't a d-e.
- eriksank 14y agoWell, if there is such d-e, the person challenging the reduction should be able to supply it. Since it just a number, he should be able to supply that number to the program and trigger a failure.
- gizmo686 14y agoOur inability to disprove a statement does not mean that the statement is true.
- gizmo686 14y agoIf the program fails, it only proves that the chosen defeatEpsilon proof does not work. In order to prove that that their is no defeatEpsilon, you would need to run you program against every function of the Real->Real. If your delta epsilon did work, you would need to test in for every delta>0.