00:11:55 Probably, although RDF files are often plain text so you can read them anyways 00:18:42 -!- bb010g has joined. 00:23:31 I learned that relatively recently. It seems suspiciously TeX-like--do you know if there is any relation between the two? 00:23:45 Wait, sorry, was thinking of RTF 00:33:50 iirc RDF is suspiciously HTML-like 00:34:35 e.g. XML but with bendy rules 00:34:43 hellolsner 00:38:03 .quit 00:38:06 -!- orin has quit (Quit: leaving). 01:07:54 Melvar: Konsole, like all of KDE, uses UCS2 01:08:29 an astral character may display correctly, but it counts as two for various things 01:16:23 coppro: Ugh. 01:16:34 UCS2 of all things... 01:27:53 -!- ais523 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 01:28:04 -!- ais523 has joined. 01:35:26 -!- TodPunk has quit (Quit: This is me, signing off. Probably rebooting or something.). 01:38:35 :/ 01:44:10 -!- TodPunk has joined. 01:56:07 I found that out when I wanted to try to fix KCharSelect not supporting codepoints outside the BMP 01:56:40 http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qchar.html I don't think it'll change anytime soon :\ 02:01:20 -!- variable has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:06:04 -!- Lymee has joined. 02:09:00 -!- Lymia has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds). 02:34:47 -!- PinealGlandOptic has joined. 02:43:04 -!- vodkode has joined. 02:45:17 olsner: No, RDF isn't specifically XML; XML is one format to store RDF data, but another is Turtle. 02:45:36 My own FOAF file also stores RDF data, but it is Turtle rather than XML. 02:45:37 See? 02:46:32 -!- Judas has joined. 02:47:23 -!- variable has joined. 02:51:54 -!- variable has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:55:08 -!- Phantom_Hoover has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 02:56:45 -!- variable has joined. 02:57:28 which is better? 03:00:14 -!- vodkode has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 03:06:09 -!- PinealGlandOptic has quit (Quit: leaving). 03:17:44 -!- MDude has changed nick to MDream. 03:32:45 -!- vodkode has joined. 03:36:11 -!- ProofTechnique has joined. 04:10:03 quintopia: Well, I prefer to use Turtle, but some prefer XML. For a simple (but not very good for writing by hand and reading manually either) format, there is N-Triples. Any N-Triples document is a valid Turtle document though; N-Triples is a subset of Turtle. 04:11:16 (Therefore any Turtle parser also parses N-Triples. The SQLite extension I wrote can convert Turtle into N-Triples.) 04:18:06 -!- GeekDude has quit (Quit: {{{}}{{{}}{{}}}{{}}} (www.adiirc.com)). 04:38:02 -!- gde33 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 05:02:31 -!- variable has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds). 05:11:49 -!- variable has joined. 05:16:25 -!- Judas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 06:01:48 -!- ^v has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 06:02:12 -!- ^v has joined. 06:19:21 -!- vodkode has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds). 06:20:56 -!- zadock has quit (Quit: Leaving). 06:34:38 -!- vodkode has joined. 06:52:45 -!- variable has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds). 06:53:24 -!- Sgeo has joined. 06:56:00 -!- Tritonio has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 06:56:25 -!- Sgeo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds). 06:59:23 -!- zadock has joined. 07:21:06 -!- ais523 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 07:21:20 -!- ais523 has joined. 07:39:51 -!- Patashu has joined. 07:44:22 -!- shikhin has joined. 07:48:51 Hm. 07:49:00 so... 07:49:08 I'll invent a religion that is offended by taxes 07:49:16 then I move to indiana, stop paying my taxes 07:49:36 I don't think that law is enforced if your religion is not christianity 07:49:41 :( 07:49:44 darn. 07:49:51 You may need to pay the politicians instead. 07:50:26 Apparently \sum_{k=0}^n k \binom{n}{k} = n 2^{n-1}. 07:50:42 but I could sell my religion as a sub-group of christianity 07:50:52 there are lots of christian churches with slightly different beleives out there. 07:51:03 possibly believes. 07:51:09 Or you could just join that religion 07:51:23 No way! 07:51:33 I wana be a pope. 07:51:37 Of my own christian church. 07:51:41 The word you want is beliefs 07:51:44 Believes is a verb 07:51:50 I like the fancy dresses I could wear then. 07:52:35 although not all christian churches have popes. 07:52:39 I guess it's just the catholics? 07:53:15 Oh, the proof of that identity is obvious 07:53:17 It's funny that protestants and catholics more or less have the same beliefs but protestants kinda see the pope as a phony. 07:54:04 fungot: What are your beliefs? 07:54:04 mroman: who is yome? arcus? gnomon? are you using ubuntu 5.10?) 07:54:10 fungot: Debian. 07:54:11 mroman: there's two of them touch when using framebuffer 07:54:19 fungot: What? 07:54:20 mroman: i used the c subset for the most part, its going to be 07:55:31 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/parents-could-be-reported-to-police-if-children-play-violent-video-games-like-call-of-duty-and-grand-theft-auto-10141697.html 07:55:34 What a shame. 07:55:48 Everybody knows that you have to start playing these games at 14 years old to become a pro by 18 07:56:04 then slowly decay until you completely suck at age 24 because you're eyes aren't fast enough anymore. 07:56:10 *your 07:56:13 fungot: A C subset? Sounds pretty limited 07:56:13 FireFly: i would simply use midi 07:56:27 fungot: so you're into music-based esolangs 07:56:27 FireFly: what is /dev/ random, but there's no message, window creation just silently errors out :) 07:56:37 Is C without pointers still turing complete? 07:59:10 yes 07:59:16 well, uh 07:59:20 can you still use arrays? 07:59:22 if so, yes. 07:59:39 if not... yeah, you have recursion 07:59:44 Since C isn't turing complete to begin with... 07:59:57 coppro: recursion isn't enough 08:00:07 Jafet: True. 08:00:10 b_jonas: you have recursion and branching 08:00:11 but in any case, you can use files and seeks 08:00:23 coppro: even still, that just makes a stack automaton 08:01:09 coppro: aren't arrays just pointers? 08:01:25 a[b] is defined as *(a+b) or something 08:01:34 also a[b] == b[a] 08:02:04 no wait, without pointers you can't open a file 08:02:07 damn 08:02:10 then I dunno 08:02:49 but let's forbid array neveretheless for fun 08:02:54 no arrays. :) 08:03:16 & * and [] are disallowed. 08:03:37 Jafet: it's useful to talk about C being "turing-complete" in a slightly less strict sense 08:04:19 while C, by definition, has finite memory, we can easily pretend it has unbounded memory, or you could make logical or actual shims to get around this 08:04:37 (e.g. "compile this code with N bit pointers, if it runs out of memory, compile with 2N bit pointers, etc." 08:05:11 mroman: http://c-faq.com/aryptr/aryptr2.html 08:06:49 coppro: there is file access in the C standard 08:07:03 and nothing in the standard restricts an impl from providing infinitely large files 08:08:02 -!- shikhin has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds). 08:08:56 coppro: That's why I added "let's forbid array nevertheless" :) 08:11:52 ais523: true, but that's not reliable either 08:12:11 but I suppose that it does let you get around the inherent boundedness 08:12:18 it's more interesting to do as I described though : 08:12:19 :) 08:12:42 also there's the weird case of forming a PDA using register variables and recursion 08:12:51 I don't believe anything in C prevents that being possible 08:14:02 anyway, b_jonas might have it right. I'm having difficulty convincing myself you can do better than a DPDA, since the memory you have access to at any given point is finite 08:15:29 well, exploiting UB you have other options 08:15:41 like longjmp /into/ a function, which is totally illegal 08:16:03 but which does normally work in practice if you're jumping back to the function you just came from with no function calls in between 08:16:11 -!- shikhin has joined. 08:16:13 again, let's not assume that works 08:16:18 actually, is that TC? 08:19:47 -!- ais523 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 08:19:53 -!- callforjudgement has joined. 08:22:20 callforjudgement: I odn't think so 08:22:50 I'm trying to figure out what our assumptions are 08:23:01 you have a stack, and a pointer into that stack 08:23:08 the pointer can be moved downwards, or to the top 08:23:12 and you can push and pop things on the stack 08:23:18 oh, it is TC 08:23:19 -!- callforjudgement has changed nick to ais523. 08:23:26 that gives you enough control to use the stack as a queue 08:23:31 and one queue is enough 08:23:56 admittedly, the construction I'm thinking of contains a memory leak, but that doesn't matter for TCness 08:24:29 it can't be moved arbitrarily anywhere 08:24:39 How is it moved to the top of the stack? 08:24:46 oh, I see what you're thinking of 08:24:49 FireFly: by longjmping to yourself 08:24:51 yes, I think that works 08:25:08 oh. 08:27:08 ais523: you can't longjmp without pointers either 08:27:18 ais523: longjmp takes a pointer argument 08:27:28 or doesn't it? 08:27:41 b_jonas: it takes a jmp_buf argument 08:27:43 which is opaque 08:27:44 oh, it doesn't 08:27:46 great 08:27:57 hmm 08:28:11 admittedly you could make the point of "a jmp_buf must be finitely large, so you can use memcpy to look at the individual bits" 08:28:29 however, it could be implemented as offsets into a jump table with finitely many keys, but unboundedly large values 08:38:23 is jmp_buf allowed to fail? 08:38:36 jmp_buf is a type 08:38:43 I don't think setjmp is allowed to fail, but I'm not sure 08:39:07 it isn't 08:39:14 I happen to have a C11 draft open 08:39:18 so I quickly checked 08:41:15 -!- ais523 has quit. 09:21:10 -!- cpressey has joined. 09:21:35 hello 09:25:25 http://divisbyzero.com/2014/08/27/tangent-lines-to-the-sine-function-with-rational-slope/ <- I am very suspicious. I don't think this is right. 09:25:44 trivially, m=0 is also rational and also a tangent of the sine curve 09:26:30 less trivially... surely if a and c are irrational and b is rational and a < b < c and there is a continuous curve from a to c, it passes through b? 09:26:35 that one i'm less sure of 09:36:09 -!- vodkode has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds). 09:44:42 "...and a similar proof holds for the sine and cosine functions. Thus," <-- SLOPPY 09:45:27 The "similar proof" seems to be "if α is a nonzero algebraic number then sin(α), cos(α), tan(α) are transcendental" 09:46:16 what if α is nonzero, but non-algebraic, i.e. rational? 09:46:44 am I the only one awake here right now? :) 09:47:08 cpressey, I am looking at it 09:47:13 I NEED SOMETHING TO ENTERTAIN ME WHILE I OPTIMIZE QUERIES THROUGH THE GAUZE OF AN ORM 09:47:23 I think all rationals are algebraic 09:47:49 Taneb: yeah, technically that's true 09:49:12 -!- heroux has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds). 09:49:30 Because a/b is a root of bx-a = 0 09:49:53 But then how can you say simple things like "slope = dy/dx = tan(theta)"? if tan(theta) is transcendental, then it's irrational, and cannot be expressed by dy/dx ! 09:51:19 I suspect there's some subtlety lurking in "transcendental" vs "irrational" 09:52:01 dy and dx are not integers, or indeed rationals 09:52:14 So dy/dx is not a rational 09:52:21 höhö. Real Time Ad Bidding 09:52:26 What a genius idea 09:52:52 ok; then you can only say "dy/dx = tan(theta)" if either dy or dx or both is irrational 09:54:04 so weird, because it seems to be the equivalent of saying there is no theta such that tan(theta) = 1/2 09:54:08 I believe dy and dx are both infinitismals 09:54:32 * cpressey backs away in fear 09:54:42 (in the context of derivatives) 09:54:46 Calculus is not my strong suit 09:54:56 However I agree that the conclusion of that blog post seems wrong 09:58:15 Taneb: calculus is *definitely* not my strong suit; this is actually the first thing lately in it that has piqued my interest. thanks for looking at it... 10:00:06 < coppro> an astral character may display correctly, but it counts as two for various things – Well, for what things? I need some kind of testcase to subject candidate recommendations to. 10:02:34 maybe the theta in tan(theta) = 1/2 is BEYOND TRANSCENDENTAL!!! 10:03:11 ok, unlikely 10:03:31 my word, this coffee is awful 10:08:23 -!- ^v has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 10:08:24 -!- Lymee has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds). 10:08:51 -!- ^v has joined. 10:16:11 cpressey, that theta is certainly transcendental 10:18:53 Aha! 10:19:10 It's not asking whether there are any lines with rational gradient that are tangent to sin(x) 10:19:32 It's asking whether there are any lines with rational gradient that also go throw the origin that are tangent to sin(x) 10:22:43 ah. ok, that eliminates m=0 10:22:58 yeah, he didn't say y=mx+b, he just said y=mx 10:25:11 -!- boily has joined. 10:25:21 so that kind of reduces it to... what kind of number is arctan(1/2)? because, if tan(theta) is transcendental for theta != 0, ... 10:25:55 which could be reduced to "inverses of transcendental functions, how do they work?" 10:26:45 is the range really restricted to irrational numbers (and we just fudge it for practical purposes?) 10:27:17 s/range/domain/ 10:28:00 -!- Lymia has joined. 10:29:39 -!- hjulle has joined. 10:29:52 you know, it might actually *be* "beyond transcendental" 10:30:18 an uncomputable real (or at least, inexpressible as a transcendental) 10:31:47 -!- oerjan has joined. 10:38:05 scow <-- so what's "scow" in hebrew 10:47:30 -!- hjulle has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds). 10:55:51 but I could sell my religion as a sub-group of christianity <-- tricky, i'm afraid that biblical jesus explicitly answered the question of whether to pay taxes. 10:56:46 oerjan: he did? 10:57:43 that capitalist. 10:58:08 -!- shikhin_ has joined. 10:59:05 matthew 22:17-21 10:59:22 actually the english seems to use "tribute" 11:00:03 although it *may* be a bit confusing with us dollars, they have *both* a picture of a president and "in god we trust" on them. 11:01:33 -!- shikhin has quit (Disconnected by services). 11:02:02 oerjan: so what kind of number is arctan(1/2) anyway 11:02:15 > arctan (1/2) 11:02:16 Not in scope: ‘arctan’ 11:02:16 Perhaps you meant ‘atan’ (imported from Prelude) 11:02:23 > atan (1/2) 11:02:24 0.4636476090008061 11:02:28 > atan (1/2) / pi 11:02:30 0.14758361765043326 11:02:40 well 11:02:41 because if theta != 0 then tan(theta) is transcendental, and 1/2 is not transcendental 11:02:46 I can't give my money back to the guys that are on the bill 11:02:47 -!- shikhin_ has changed nick to shikhin. 11:02:49 because they are dead 11:03:20 cpressey: erm presumably theta must be rational or algebraic or the like for that to be true. 11:03:38 algebraic, yes. and 1/2 is algebraic 11:04:27 er -- not that 1/2 being algebraic is very relevant. 11:04:33 atan(1) is pi/4 iirc 11:04:36 (i think. easy to get confused) 11:04:43 > atan 1 / pi 11:04:44 0.25 11:06:49 oerjan: you can see the log for context, but: a "slight variation" on Lindemann–Weierstrass theorem says that if a is algebraic and != 0, sin(a) is transcendental. so... if sin(a) is 1/2, it's not transcendental, so... is a not algebraic? 11:06:56 a is transcendental 11:06:58 i guess 11:07:13 oh sin is easier 11:07:19 > asin(1/2)/pi 11:07:21 0.16666666666666669 11:07:26 well, any transcendental function would suffer from this it seems 11:07:33 it's pi/6 11:07:45 ok ok i don't care about the values 11:07:51 which is indeed not algebraic 11:07:56 let me try the other tack 11:08:08 cpressey: but yes, that does imply a is not algebraic. 11:08:08 surely if a and c are irrational and b is rational and a < b < c and there is a continuous curve from a to c, it passes through b? 11:08:09 -!- idris-bot has quit (Quit: Terminated). 11:08:24 -!- idris-bot has joined. 11:08:32 yes, that's the intermediate value theorem. 11:08:52 oerjan: then how what why http://divisbyzero.com/2014/08/27/tangent-lines-to-the-sine-function-with-rational-slope/ 11:09:31 surely there will be SOME slope that passes through a rational as the slope varies as you "slide" up and down the sine curve 11:10:05 yes. and this is a problem how? 11:10:11 OH 11:10:21 through the ORIGIN 11:10:24 oh jeez 11:10:31 ok n/m 11:10:39 that result seems ultra-trivial now 11:11:01 um that link does not speak about the origin? 11:11:08 yes, it does 11:11:57 just reading comprehension fail on my part -- even after Taneb pointed it out (i was thinking y-axis for some reason) 11:13:07 I still think there's some right weirdness about transcendental functions 11:13:14 but it's much less weird than it seemed earlier 11:13:57 oerjan, US dollars tell us to trust God when He says give to Washington what is Washington's or something 11:14:48 Taneb: fiendish 11:15:22 Is Washington even on US currency? 11:17:31 until they replace the $1 bill with a coin, like all the SANE countries have done, i think he is 11:17:54 or is that someone else? don't really rememebr 11:18:07 it is washington 11:18:10 I haven't been to the US since I was 3 11:18:14 * oerjan was just looking it up 11:21:21 -!- boily has quit (Quit: MISALIGNED CHICKEN). 11:22:06 -!- shikhin has changed nick to godofgods. 11:22:48 -!- godofgods has changed nick to shikhin. 11:27:47 i get it now; flipside of Lindemann–Weierstrass; if f(a) is rational, and f is a transcendental function, then a must be transcendental 11:28:45 well, or at least for sin/cos/tan; there may be other, weirder functions 11:29:46 I NEED SOMETHING TO ENTERTAIN ME WHILE I OPTIMIZE QUERIES THROUGH THE GAUZE OF AN ORM <-- this gets so much better if you use the norwegian meaning of ORM 11:30:30 or rather, the norse meaning, which sort of includes dragons 11:31:56 cpressey: i'm not sure that "transcendental function" has a very exact meaning 11:32:03 “wyrm”? 11:32:12 Melvar: that's cognate, yes 11:32:31 also to "worm", naturally. 11:33:20 Yes, but given the inclusion of dragons, “wyrm” seemed more appropriate to ask. 11:34:03 cpressey: if you define it simply as "not algebraic", then it would include fairly trivial counterexamples. 11:34:12 And then there’s the Zamonian Orm, which is … writer’s divine inspiration, I guess? 11:34:28 i think "wyrm" may be just the old plural of "worm"? 11:35:03 @ety wyrm 11:35:03 Parse failed: TemplateHaskell is not enabled 11:35:22 … huh. 11:36:14 @ety 11:36:14 Define what? 11:36:44 int-e: bug ^ 11:37:00 are you sure? 11:37:16 ety has editing distance two from let... 11:37:27 aha 11:37:59 my brain somehow saw "Define what?" and thought "ok, that sounds like a dictionary command" 11:38:26 (Yes this auto-correction can be very confusing. But that's a different matter.) 11:39:02 ok "wyrm" isn't plural, just an older form 11:39:45 https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/worm 11:40:32 An older form for an older sense, to a degree. Neat. 11:41:05 -!- Patashu has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 11:41:27 Wonderful Object-Relational Mapper (with heavy sarcasm on the "wonderful") 11:43:37 As in Pandora's box of wonders? 11:45:03 . o O ( Though perhaps that analagy is too optimistic; there was hope in *that* box. ) 11:46:01 -!- Phantom_Hoover has joined. 11:46:12 In German, the more general sort of worms has mostly only survived in compounds like “Lindwurm” and “Tatzelwurm”. 11:47:07 I believe dy and dx are both infinitismals <-- that is if you are giving them separate meanings at all; in elementary calculus definitions dy/dx is not really decomposed into dy and dx, but is more like a notation for a higher-order function 11:48:51 there's also an option of considering dy and dx as differential forms 11:49:12 which means they're still not numbers 11:49:25 oh, we're at wurms and worms and wyrms? 11:49:35 * cpressey backs away in even more fear 11:50:27 cpressey: dy/dx is leibnit?z's intuitive notation, which works if you know what you're doing. 11:51:22 no t, apparently 11:51:40 (although at least one website got it wrong) 11:56:15 oerjan: and here i thought slope was just "rise over run" 11:56:40 who knows who put that phrase into my head 11:56:49 some math teacher, way back when 11:56:57 that's the average slope 11:57:08 but if you want slope at a point, you must take the limit of that 11:57:17 yes, i suppose you must 11:58:04 and then it gets all ugly 11:58:59 not necessarily uglier than when you don't take the limit 11:59:45 the limit allows you to toss away many of the error terms 12:01:28 -!- AnotherTest has joined. 12:12:10 well... philosophically ugly? 12:13:14 "infinitesimals" 12:13:49 some will wave their hands, others will attempt to build a workable basis under it 12:15:15 still others will shout "NO!", perhaps 12:15:27 the definitions in introductory calculus don't use infinitesimals. 12:16:26 indeed, you don't need to, but you can, and then they call your system of analysis "non-standard" for some reason 12:16:40 that's just an alternative approach which takes some really heavy stuff to get consistent, and which also happens to be what people hand-waved *before* they learned how to define calculus properly. 12:17:23 fine. i'm a finitist. i only believe in finitesimals. of course, i'm only taking this position in order to intentionally make it ugly 12:19:40 wikipedia does not have a page for Finitesimal 12:19:44 their loss 12:22:57 and yet... https://www.wordnik.com/words/finitesimal 12:24:45 -!- shikhin has quit (Quit: leaving). 12:42:22 actually, i wonder if i AM a finitist 12:43:02 i'm certainly not an ultrafinitist. that's just silly. 12:43:41 i believe the definition of infinite sets is valid, even though they can never be concretely realized 12:45:11 huh, it's kind of like how aesthetic philosophers can say that a picture of a unicorn has a null denotation, because unicorns don't exist 12:45:19 (as if they know unicorns don't exist) 12:54:06 would an ultrafinitist assert that 2↑↑↑6 - 2↑↑↑6 cannot be shown to be 0, on the grounds that 2↑↑↑6 is just too darn big? 12:54:49 -!- ProofTechnique has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds). 12:55:13 maybe sufficiently big numbers are susceptible to bit errors 13:01:27 . o O ( Please stand by while we evaluate that difference... ) 13:03:50 Please convince me that 2↑↑6 is a natural number. I already have trouble fitting 6^6^6^6 into my (computer's) brain... 13:03:59 ... 13:04:49 Sorry that has nothing to do with it. But indeed 2^2^2^2^2^2 is too large for my computer. :) 13:04:54 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Esenin-Volpin#Mathematical_work 13:05:05 box quote 13:06:38 yeah. 13:06:50 -!- SopaXorzTaker has joined. 13:07:09 oerjan: I think I anticipated this in my "Please stand by" remark. 13:08:05 anticipation is the sincerest form of imitation 13:09:10 From a different perspective, math is about anticipation: I anticipate that 2↑↑↑6 - 2↑↑↑6 is zero. 13:09:18 s/is/will be/ 13:10:15 what is the ratio of anticipation to perspiration 13:10:43 Ooh, infinity?! 13:11:03 I mean I actually anticipate that n-n = 1 for any natural number n. 13:11:10 ... 13:11:14 spot the typo. 13:11:18 2 is a natural number, 6 is a natural number, and and arrowarrowarrow maps pairs of natural numbers to natural numbers 13:12:22 (I have no excuse for that. I simply should not think about n/n while typing n-n...) 13:12:29 actually, i don't know what i am, because in some sense i believe 1/0 - 1/0 = 0, too 13:12:55 https://youtu.be/g10DqPbbUuw that combination of video and music disturbs me 13:13:05 cpressey: Right, there's some grounds for doubting that 2^^^6 is a natural number. 13:13:59 i used to be an infinitist, but then i took an arrow to the knee 13:14:00 int-e: i don't see them, though (unless they lie in the area of doubt about the validity of structural induction) 13:14:02 I'm pretty sure that 1/0 is not a natural number, as a matter of anticipation: Such a natural number d would have to satisfy d*0 = 1, but I anticipate that d*0 will always be 0 instead. 13:14:28 (today's retro-meme sponsored by coca-cola (TM)) 13:14:33 (I also anticipate this discussion getting out of hand.) 13:16:06 oerjan, 2012 is retro!? 13:16:36 -!- ProofTechnique has joined. 13:16:53 isn't it older than that 13:17:56 Skyrim came out in November 2011 13:18:01 So yes, but not by much 13:19:04 of course the first thing i heard about the meme was people being sick of it 13:21:55 i also think I believe there are more natural numbers than there are even natural numbers 13:22:20 yes, i know those two sets have the same cardinality 13:22:57 hm. 13:23:08 I'd say that the set of natural numbers should be bigger than the set of even/odd numbers 13:23:14 since only every second number is even/odd 13:23:15 so 13:23:16 I believe that the weather is terrible here right now 13:23:22 ~metar EGNT 13:23:26 the set of natural numbers should be twice as large. 13:23:55 that only seems intuitive. and, as we all know, in mathematics, intuition reigns 13:24:08 Afterall 13:24:17 every number except 1 should be the same size as every number except 2 13:24:33 and smaller then the set of every number 13:24:34 *than 13:24:39 @metar ENVA 13:24:40 ENVA 311320Z 25005KT 210V290 9999 FEW040TCU 05/M03 Q0982 NOSIG RMK WIND 670FT 33003KT 13:24:46 @metar EGNT 13:24:47 EGNT 311320Z 28024G35KT 9999 FEW015CB 07/01 Q1000 13:24:49 At least that's my intuition as a sucker at math. 13:26:21 1/n for n -> infinity is infinity too 13:26:30 eh 13:26:33 1/n for n -> 0 is infinity 13:26:52 which suggests that infinity * 0 may be 1! 13:27:22 which doesn't make sense :) 13:28:11 1/n for n -> infinity is 0 (according to many people) 13:28:48 yep 13:28:52 i meant -> 0 13:31:25 just because 1/0 - 1/0 = 0 (in my current madness) doesn't mean that 1/0 = infinity, i should note 13:32:26 it's more that 1/0 is "poorly defined" but - is able to operate on things that are poorly defined 13:32:29 -!- MDream has changed nick to MDude. 13:36:36 i would have to work this out in detail, but "how many [even] natural numbers" are also "poorly defined", but again, > is able to operate on them 13:37:08 i'm just kind of hoping someone here sees my madness as says "oh yes, i've seen that before, that's ____ism" 13:38:30 -!- shikhin has joined. 13:49:13 -!- AnotherTest has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds). 13:56:55 -!- SopaXorzTaker has quit (Remote host closed the connection). 14:02:44 -!- `^_^v has joined. 14:07:21 -!- shikhin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds). 14:09:54 -!- shikhin has joined. 14:11:38 -!- ProofTechnique has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in). 14:15:48 -!- ^v has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer). 14:16:09 -!- GeekDude has joined. 14:16:13 -!- ^v has joined. 14:16:35 -!- shikhin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds). 14:16:58 -!- shikhin has joined. 14:18:11 -!- ProofTechnique has joined. 14:27:10 -!- shikhin has quit (Quit: leaving). 14:30:01 -!- hjulle has joined. 14:40:07 you may well ask what i believe 0 * 1/0 to be. 14:40:11 it's very simple. 14:40:23 0 * 1/0 contains a race condition, and should not be used in production mathematics 14:41:00 Melvar: in a terminal emulator, it will sort of occupy two columns 14:41:02 sort of not 14:41:19 if you backspace it, you only delete the second surrogate and not the first also 14:48:20 another option is that 0 * 1/0 = {0, 1}. why should square root have all the fun of being multi-valued? 14:50:16 cpressey, 0*x = 0, so {0, 1} = 0 * 1/0 = (0*x) * 1/0 = 0 * (x * 1/0) = 0 * (x/0) = x??? 14:52:01 coppro: I’ve never noticed any such errors in either gnome-terminal or xfce4-terminal, fwiw. 14:53:21 cpressey, I am suggesting that the set of values 0 * 1/0 is the set of values multiplication is defined for and remains associative 14:54:37 Taneb: yes, well. race conditions are nasty 14:56:30 I believe I will retreat to either 0 * 1/0 = 0, or 0 * 1/0 = 0/0 (which is also "poorly defined") 14:57:04 it could also be 0 * 1 * 0^(-1) = 0 * 0^(-1) * 1 = 1, no? 14:57:47 -!- zadock has quit (Quit: Leaving). 14:58:38 I have definitely not defined ^ yet 14:58:51 And what is it with all this so-called "algebra" 14:59:16 0 * 1/0 = 0/0 holds in wheel theory, anyway. 15:00:02 Melvar: yeah 15:00:11 Melvar: but how configurable and nice are they? 15:00:15 can I get rid of all the window decoration? 15:03:52 if wheel theory can make the guts of this madness consistent, i'm all for it 15:04:03 https://github.com/aheui/aheui.aheui 15:04:26 awesome 15:04:32 https://github.com/aheui/aheui.aheui/blob/master/aheui.aheui 15:04:41 possibly even more awesome if you can read hangul 15:04:48 because then it sounds like something instead of just looks like something 15:06:02 -!- shikhin has joined. 15:06:58 -!- SopaXorzTaker has joined. 15:07:54 cpressey, even to native speakers, this is *really* weird sounded. :) 15:08:06 :) 15:11:14 coppro: I am rid of the window decoration by dint of using xmonad, don’t know how one would remove it if something chooses to draw it in the first place; the menu bar is hideable. In general, probably less configurable than konsole, just by a rule of thumb. 15:11:23 Hm. 15:16:30 -!- gde33 has joined. 15:19:05 yeah, no, yeah, wheel theory isn't going to help this 15:23:13 oh great, now i'm listening to bjork singing about lucky nights "when 1 + 1 = 3." this isn't helping 15:25:01 i don't see why my multiplication *has* to be commutative 15:25:25 it's just more useful that way 15:25:56 matrix multiplication is not commutative and still useful 15:28:34 -!- shikhin has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds). 15:29:26 does anybody know if there was anything about two-dimensional languages of interest in "real science" besides PLAN2D? 15:30:23 do 2D cellular automata qualify? 15:30:48 whoa. i had not heard of PLAN2D. 15:31:05 1974. 15:31:31