raoof

FRACTRAN has a goto instruction so it is not a total model of computation but my claim is that Ar is a total model of computation. maybe unrolled FRACTRAN is a total model of computation too, I have to think about that

the only approach to practical programming with Ar is to have external dependencies on hard to compute functions until I implement them :)

in my model it's the platform job to handle the user input and your program output you just write your function and the platform calls your program for example f(time,input_data,key_a,key_b,key_c,...) . if you are very very patient and don't care about the program length you can just compute every output of your program for every possible input. according to [this](https://web.archive.org/web/20230505022436/http://page.mi.fu...) paper a single loop and four basic arithmetic operation is enough to simulate a turing machine so my idea was that to unroll the loop and my conjecture is that we don't need the loop and only four operations is enough to compute all total computable functions

it takes a lot of time and patient to come up with a function that works for all n and also have a short length, let me try if I can solve this problem it may takes a few hours or days or maybe months I'll post the solution here so stay tuned. but if you want to make your life easier you can generate the function in a meta language so you can always be sure that your software does not have a halting problem

(now I can reply here, let me repeat it again) it depend how you want to display the result to the user, you can just compute a number that represent an html page showing the numbers from 1 to n

(it seems like I can't reply to your last comment so I do it here) it depend how you want to display the result to the user, you can just compute a number that represent an html page showing the numbers from 1 to n

the language is obviously (at least to me) turing-complete in the limit of the program length. even if you don't buy my argument that it is also turing-complete without the limit notice that in ordinary programming you never need a function that is valid on all input because actual computers have time and memory limitation

if you don't want to melt your brain :D you just precompute the value of any functions f(x) for x<n otherwise you need to be very clever I explained my idea in the link

consciousness is like a joke, if you think it needs an explanation you already miss it. I struggled with myself to convince Dennett that his conscious so much that I ended up losing it myself I hope you don't make the same mistake that I did

consciousness is equivalent to the halting function h(p,n) where p is a physical process and n is time, we know how to turn a physical process into a virtual process but we don't know how to turn consciousness itself into a virtual process

I can see that you can symbolically talk about the power set of (0,1) and say it's cardinality is bigger than the set itself (although I haven't studied sets and cardinalities deeply enough) but I can't see what Real numbers offers against the computable Universe hypothesis

the proofs that I've read shows that the list of infinite binary strings between [0,1] are uncountable because the invert of the diagonal of the list is not on the list, do you know any proof that does not refer to the invert of the diagonal?

you can't prove something just by assuming it that would be trivial, if we can build or convince ourselves how to build a wormhole or a time machine then we can believe in Real numbers

if you put 1 out then there is no reason to believe it is uncountable because you can sort the list such that the diagonal is all 0s (if you know an argument that shows [0,1) is uncountable I'd be happy to know)

if Reality!=0.111... :

  the Universe is computable ( the list of infinite binary strings between [0,1) is countable )

else:

  the Universe is non-computable ( the list of infinite binary strings between [0,1] is uncountable )

how do you solve this dilemma?

thank you for the recommendation

that would get way too much time to reach an acceptable state for one person and creating your own game engine is much better

interesting in any sense

thanks for the idea but not that interesting beside I don't have access to RPi

didn't read the whole article but I have to say that having a non-mechanical process in the ontology of the Universe does not mean nonsense, it's not obvious that AI is not possible but also it's not obvious that we are just a body so why should we believe in a meaningless and boring universe rather than a meaningful and wonderful one and also if it turns out that there is no room for a non-mechanical process in the Universe then we can believe that consciousness is equivalent to existence meaning if the Universe seems meaningful and wonderful then it is really meaningful and wonderful no matter how much you try to explain the meaning and wonder away.

I hope it's okay to post to my own article.

I don't understand your philosophical position. mind body problem is not about the data it's about explanation, how much data do you need? we are bombarded with data every second of our lives.

if I am inconsistent how can I trust the conclusion that I am a machine considering that my desire is to not to be?

I have to say I'm just an amateur programmer but if there are absolute undecidable statements then what is the point of thinking? and if we are inconsistent what is the point of science? why not call it religion?

I think ape currently modifies the file but my idea (that partially inspired by it) don't need to modify the executable you just double click on windows and `chmod +x` it on mac and linux and it will run, and rename the file to .apk to install on android same for ios. and we can also use webassembly to share code or even use PWA for all platform and also with a little effort we can make it bootable on all architecture.

apart from all negative point the positive point is that we can make .zip file act like a .iso file and .iso file act like .html file and .html act like a bash and .bat file and have a global executable format bootable.apk...zip.iso.html.bat that run on all platform I mean literally all platform.

because it has all the pieces of the puzzle to turn into a C, like D that has a -betterC flag I hope that maybe they add something like that for C#.

I also hope you keep working on D(betterC) but for now I stick with C, generating C using bb(clojure) is also an option.

a little off topic. has anybody tried using C# as a nicer C ? I tried using D(betterC) a while ago but I hit some compiler bugs that was annoying. I also tried Zig but compilation times is not preferable. I don't want anything better than C I just want nicer C and without header files and compiler bugs.

hi. I tested with chrome and firefox on my own linux system and chrome on another windows pc, I guess it will work with most browsers unless it is too old.

if you put the initiator at the top and also add "<script> window.stop();</script>" the page start rendering immediately. I have the same idea but for running simple x86 linux binary in the browser. anybody interested?