Re: Brent's answer to Bruno's puzzle

>> Exercise: >> What is wrong with the following argument. (I recall that by >> definition >> a function from N to N is defined on all natural numbers). >> >> (false) theorem: the set of computable functions from N to N is not >> enumerable. >> (erroneous) proof: let us suppose (by absurdum) tha

Re: Cantor's Diagonal

Bruno Marchal wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > I agree with Barry, but apaprently you have still a problem, so I > comment your posts. > > > Le 16-déc.-07, à 10:49, Daniel Grubbs a écrit : > > Hi Folks, > > I joined this list a while ago but I haven't really kept up. > Anyway, I saw the

Re: Cantor's Diagonal

Hi Daniel, I agree with Barry, but apaprently you have still a problem, so I comment your posts. Le 16-déc.-07, à 10:49, Daniel Grubbs a écrit : > Hi Folks, > > I joined this list a while ago but I haven't really kept up.  Anyway, > I saw the reference to Cantor's Diagonal and thought perha