danharaj

93 ms·

811.
by danharaj 8y ago
If you use LEM to prove A, you can translate that proof into intuitionistic logic so that it proves Not (Not A). This is classically equivalent to A, but not intuitionistically. So the real difference between the two is that intuitionistic
812.
by danharaj 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-negation_translation
813.
by danharaj 8y ago
They should care if stupid VCs going bust is correlated with other leveraged positions in unrelated sectors.
814.
by danharaj 8y ago
Strictly weaker in a weak sense, every classically true proof can be translated into a correct constructive proof of a similar theorem that is classically equivalent. So is it weaker or is it more fine-grained? That's a philosophical q
815.
by danharaj 8y ago
There are settings where LEM is inadmissible. A lot of important mathematics comes from importing some theory into another, e.g. the theory of topological groups. Knowing in fine detail what principles a proof relies on let's you know
816.
by danharaj 8y ago
One thing I think will eventually come out of linear logic is that in classical linear logic there's no intrinsic division between inputs in outputs. In LL it's the case that implication, which corresponds to functions in programm
817.
by danharaj 8y ago
A lot of machines that purport to solve an NP-hard problem in a short period of time have some trick that makes them impractical, like requiring the ability to reduce the noise floor in a signal exponentially or pump an exponential amount o
818.
by danharaj 8y ago
There are earlier revisions of that arxiv submission from 2017. I think if it had introduced an idea that can prove a problem this hard, it would have already been creating buzz. Otherwise I don't know what to make of its submission hi
819.
by danharaj 8y ago
I'm skeptical
820.
by danharaj 8y ago
> I'm talking to a machine, not a person. This isn't a two-way conversation. I guess you operate your computer with no output devices?
821.
by danharaj 8y ago
> that while males are more fundamentally interested in things, females are more fundamentally interested in people. Even assuming this, code is about people and getting more people into it that center their work around people is how tec
822.
by danharaj 8y ago
There are for sure things of this world that are not explicable, even in principle.
823.
by danharaj 8y ago
Attended a talk about teaching programming to kids by the first author that was well attended by programmers and teachers. It was a very enriching experience. I'm definitely going to read this through.
824.
by danharaj 8y ago
This isn't very dialectical.
825.
by danharaj 8y ago
That's definitely not why I post on HN and i think its terribly useless to hold universal positions on what motivates people. "Speak for yourself" and all that.
826.
by danharaj 8y ago
With what? Fake internet points? Some reward, where do I redeem them?
827.
by danharaj 8y ago
> ...abstraction is just something human minds perceive. This itself is a physical phenomenon :)
828.
by danharaj 8y ago
"It's the law" never justified anything.
829.
by danharaj 8y ago
I've uses a zbook on an airplane. Definitely convenient to carry around that much power. Although I don't think mobile workstations quite get their max performance because of throttling.
830.
by danharaj 8y ago
That's sounds a little absurd. A five year old child knows that 3 fingers is the same 3 as 3 ducks. Certainly 5000 years ago people understood 3 without ever knowing what an axiom is. The peano axioms didn't create arithmetic, ari
831.
by danharaj 8y ago
This corresponds to type II computability of the reals whereas the paper, as I skimmed it, is about type I computability.
832.
by danharaj 8y ago
The argument of the author is not that the real numbers are poorly named, it's that the mathematical abstraction supposes physically impossible properties of the model. Therefore physics ought to be based on an abstraction that has mor
833.
by danharaj 8y ago
This is an extremely unusual conception of epistemology, even for mathematics. This knowledge that is contingent on axioms isn't at all convincing. At the beginning of the 20th century, this was a raging debate. It wasn't quite re
834.
by danharaj 8y ago
What is the cardinality of the powerset of the naturals?
835.
by danharaj 8y ago
Neutrinos oscillate between different flavors. If a sterile neutrino exists then we will see deviations in the distribution of detected neutrino flavors because they will oscillate differently.
836.
by danharaj 8y ago
What I'm saying is that linear logic is exactly a technical exploration directly pertinent to the questions Quine and Dummett considered. And who cares if the paper is specifically about Quine and Dummett? What's the point of resu
837.
by danharaj 8y ago
I should say, definitely not mine. I don't know where I got it, or where they got it.
838.
by danharaj 8y ago
A philosophical discussion of logic in this decade should at least be aware of the Curry-Howard isomorphism and Linear Logic. This paper makes a passing mention of this by treating the law of excluded middle. I would say that denying that l
839.
by danharaj 8y ago
Sure, they could just ring up their VC buddies and raise the capital they'd need.
840.
by danharaj 8y ago
"Adjusted for inflation" is an opaque term and doesn't actually explain which costs they controlled for. I doubt they controlled for both healthcare and housing.

More ›