random

[David C. Ullrich]

On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 14:06:03 -0500, Michael Chermside
<mcherm at destiny.com> wrote:

>David C. Ullrich wrote:
>
>> > 
>> > [An lengthy and EXCELLENT detailed description of Omega, how it's 
>> >  defined, why it is/isn't "random", and how it all relates -- all 
>> >  expressed in terms a layperson can follow.]
>> > 
>
>Well, it's certainly the case that you can still learn things on USENET.
>Thanks!

Glad you liked it. Not sure exactly what post this is referring to.
You should note that several things I've said here have been just 
plain wrong.

(A relatively unimportant example, where I said something utterly
stupid and the person I said it too just payed no attention instead
of explaining how ridiculous I'd just been: Someone said something
about the size of the smallest algorithm to calculuate the first
N bits of Omega. I butt in and said there was no such algorithm.
Nonsense - there is an algoritm to calculate any sequence of N bits.
What there isn't is a way to know _which_ algorithm calculates the
first N bits of Omega.

Thought about posting a retraction, couldn't easily find
it a few days later, hidden among all the erroneous
non-corrections. Been feeling like I was in a state of
sin since then, now I feel better.)


>-- Michael Chermside
>



David C. Ullrich
*********************
"Sometimes you can have access violations all the 
time and the program still works." (Michael Caracena, 
comp.lang.pascal.delphi.misc 5/1/01)