From: J. Andrew Rogers (andrew@ceruleansystems.com)
Date: Sun Jun 22 2008 - 23:38:54 MDT
On Jun 22, 2008, at 10:21 PM, Peter de Blanc wrote:
> If you'll look at the program I supplied, you'll notice a 0 at the
> end. If you run the program, it'll output a near-copy of itself,
> different only in that the 0 has been replaced with a 1. In general,
> program N will output a near-copy of itself, except the N at the end
> will be replaced with N+1.
If your "counter" does not occupy memory then the complexity is
constant. If it does occupy memory, it is eating bits as N grows on a
finite machine. Either way, you have a problem.
All that aside, your assertion is contrary to some pretty rudimentary
(for this list) theorems in mathematics. Without inspecting your
argument, that alone should have suggested something was amiss.
J. Andrew Rogers
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT