Perhaps you just don't get it, but proving the validity does not require giving you an example, only proof of all the pertinent concepts. For example, you could state that it is possible to travel at Mach 10 (which it is in a handful of vehicles), and using your reasoning demand that the only proof of human Mach 10 travel is a video of you personally going Mach 10. It would be stupid and ridiculous for me to deny the fact that it is a trivial engineering exercise to travel at Mach 10 despite the fact that you can't do it personally. I'm using "trivial" to mean mundane in an technical sense (i.e. no special or yet undiscovered magic); I am not using it to imply "cheap and easily accessible".
"Perhaps you just don't get it, but proving the validity does not require giving you an example, only proof of all the pertinent concepts." - tortoise
"The jury is not "out" and this is trivially demonstrable. ALL programs of finite length can be produced in a finite amount of time by stupid automata.
47 posted on 2/28/02 11:16 PM Pacific by tortoiseIt is trivial to demonstrate a set of biases that will work, and given the thermodynamic chaos of the universe it is rather obvious that those biases must be occurring regularly.
57 posted on 2/28/02 11:37 PM Pacific by tortoise
"Just show me an example of random noise producing a useful program..." - Southack
Did you have an example? - VaBThang
"It would be trivial to demonstrate, though it would likely take longer than I am willing to donate CPU cycles on my machines to generate a long enough noise stream (it depends on the size of the program that has to be generated to prove it)."
92 posted on 3/2/02 10:45 AM Pacific by tortoise
Face up to science, tortoise. You aren't capable of producing an example, demonstration, or even showing the math for your wild-eyed claims.
You'll have to find some lame excuse to flee this thread without producing said support, even though you claim that such exercises are "trivial".