Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Complexity

Expand Messages
  • John J. Gagne
    ... Technically speaking, I m not sure this is correct. What can we say about the difficulty of *the* process of generating strings (not just any random
    Message 1 of 44 , Dec 1 8:39 AM
      Michael Olea said:

      > The point was just that Kolmogorov complexity is not a very good
      > measure of how difficult something is to learn, if what is being
      > learned is not strings but a processes for producing them.

      Technically speaking, I'm not sure this is correct. What can we say
      about the difficulty of *the* process of generating strings (not just
      any "random" sequence but *the* "random" sequence) with high
      Kolmogorov complexity? Certainly, that the length of the program for
      generating the string is not much less than the length of the sequence
      in question.

      Any such sequence and/or process is random by the AIT definition of
      random. Both the process and sequence are random.

      Non-random processes have shorter descriptions in some fixed universal
      description language.

      This results from how "random" is defined within AIT, which is
      different than the intuitive concept of randomness which is usually
      attributed to some inherently random process such a flipping a fair coin.

      JJG
    • John J. Gagne
      ... Shaka, when the walls fell... ... Temba, his arms wide ... Zinda, his face black, his eyes red!!! ... Sokath, his eyes uncovered! Picard and Dathon at
      Message 44 of 44 , Dec 3 9:33 AM
        Jim Whitescarver wrote:

        > > Furthermore, it is not at all clear to me, that any axiomatic
        > > approach can tell us anything definite about quantum complexity
        > > and hence how the universe, and truth itself really work.

        Shaka, when the walls fell...

        JJG said:

        > As long as one of those three degrees is labeled "undecidable" I'm
        > good with it.

        Temba, his arms wide

        JJG said:

        > It's only when someone wishes to apply the tag "both" in
        > any serious discussion that I tend to see red as my blood pressure
        > approaches max.

        Zinda, his face black, his eyes red!!!

        > Agreed, we only see discrete outcomes. If decidable, we get a
        > deterministic outcome, otherwise we get a random outcome. However,
        > if we ask what outcomes we get from an undecidable bit, the answer
        > is both, but never both at the same time.

        Sokath, his eyes uncovered! Picard and Dathon at El-Adrel...
        John and Jim at yahoo.ai-philosophy.com

        ;o)

        JJG
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.