thecha

yes it is still running

rindolf

thecha: it's oovrakhah

thecha: it should take less than a minute.

thecha: it should take less than a minute.

thecha

oovrakhah :)

ah

the one with the 13 thousand computed instantly

ah

the one with the 13 thousand computed instantly

rindolf

thecha: can you show the code?

thecha

the one with the 6billion is still running :/

oh in english it is 600 milliard

of course hang on

https://pastebin.com/HLDGnqre

6*10¹¹

oh in english it is 600 milliard

of course hang on

https://pastebin.com/HLDGnqre

6*10¹¹

rindolf

thecha: your identifiers are now too long and they are not separated by underscores or CamelCase or whatever.

thecha

rindofl ahh thanks

rindolf i will use underscroe from now on

i try to keep the camelcase for classes

id idnt get to comenting

rindolf i will use underscroe from now on

i try to keep the camelcase for classes

id idnt get to comenting

rindolf

thecha: some notes - 1 . You can divide the number by the lower factors to obtain a lower number.

thecha

i forgot abotu comenting half way through

yeah i thought about

it

yeah i thought about

it

rindolf

thecha: 2. If you reach past the square root of the remaining number - you'll know it's prime.

thecha

but i didnt want to ahh

i see

i see

rindolf

thecha: didn't want what?

thecha

i didnt want to run it upwards i thought if i go from the top down i only have to find one prime

little did i know it woudl take so long

well i will do it from the bottom up then

little did i know it woudl take so long

well i will do it from the bottom up then

rindolf

thecha: sounds good.

thecha

that was my original idea but then i thougth why not cut out all the other prime fctors by just going after the highest

-_-'

ok i will be back

hopefully with problem 4

:S

-_-'

ok i will be back

hopefully with problem 4

:S

pewpau

false implies true. Why is the implication true? Could it have been another way?

pyon

pewpau: Depends on your logic.

pewpau

pyon: consensus is that the implication is true, afaik

pyon

pewpau: In classical and intuitionistic logic, anything follows from falsehood.

pewpau

ah

pyon

pewpau: But there are other logics.

pewpau: This isn't about consensus. This is about how a formal system is defined.

pewpau: This isn't about consensus. This is about how a formal system is defined.

snyp

Melonpan: so what did you concoct?

pewpau

pyon: for a formal system to be widely accepted there must be a consensus

xoydnmcoemobi

Or a person or group with authority that can override the consensus

pyon

pewpau: Who cares about accepted? You can prove theorems about and in a formal system, regardless of whether anyone (even yourself!) believes in its usefulness.

pewpau: You can define a totally crazy formal system and use it to prove theorems. They might be totally useless in the real world - but they're still theorems.

pewpau: You can define a totally crazy formal system and use it to prove theorems. They might be totally useless in the real world - but they're still theorems.

quux

well the thing is

you can't prove consistency of a theory..

unless you have something bigger

so you kinda do need to just accept that it's consistent based on the best evidence we have

you can't prove consistency of a theory..

unless you have something bigger

so you kinda do need to just accept that it's consistent based on the best evidence we have

pewpau

xoydnmcoemobi: not in science/math

adsc

what changes when false implies true is false?

pyon

pewpau: Well, in the empirical sciences, you don't prove theorems anyway.

pewpau

xoydnmcoemobi: there are no authorities in science :p

adsc

anything tangible?

pyon

pewpau: And, in mathematics, what quux said is true - ultimately you need to believe in some foundations. Or at least be willing to use them without questioning them.

ph88_

does someone know an algorithm to divide a graph up in several trees ?

pyon

ph88_: Spanning tree - it divides a connected undirected graph in exactly one tree!

If your graph isn't connected, apply the algorithm to each connected component. :-p

If your graph isn't connected, apply the algorithm to each connected component. :-p

pewpau

pyon: so many strawmen.

pyon

pewpau: Huh?

pewpau

adsc: I wonder too, that's essentially what I'm asking :p

pyon: you make assumptions about what I've (not) said

pyon: you make assumptions about what I've (not) said

quux

another way to look at the (->) question

pewpau

or read what I write very literal. you seem to lose the actual message

quux

there's only so many boolean functions 2x2 -> 2

pewpau

the big picture

quux

we call one of them AND, another OR

and one of them is (->)

and one of them is (->)

pewpau

pyon: do you have aspergers? (it's not a bad thing, just wondering in a non-degoratory way)

pyon

adsc: what changes when [false implies true] is false --> A lot of things. For instance, categorical logic becomes weird. You no longer have toposes, 'cause false isn't the initial object.

pewpau: I don't.

pewpau: I don't.

pewpau

you sure?

pyon

pewpau: Totally sure.

pewpau

k :3

xoydnmcoemobi

There is only NAND

pyon

pewpau: I spent most of my adolescence doing things that non-Asperger's people do, like playing music in a band.

pewpau

pyon: aspergians do that too

quux

hope that helps pewpau

pyon

pewpau: Probably.

adsc

pyon: is it possible to explain it in less abstract terms? my logic courses are many years back in time

pewpau

adsc: theories relying on current definition of implication falls appart

adsc

which theories are they?

pewpau

the ones pyon mentioned I guess :p. I know nothing about them

pyon

adsc: In practical terms, when you lose ex falso quodlibet (false implies anything), you lose the ability to say I call bullsh*t.

quux

pewpau, did you catch what I said just a bit ago about names

adsc

pyon: yes, intuitively, I feel this is the case, but I can't logically follow it anymore

pyon

adsc: You *notice* you have inconsistent premises because you can derive anything - even nonsensical conclusions.

pewpau

pyon: so you don't have a bachelor or master in anything? You always seem to know unusually much about everything

jontxu

"False implies true" is mostly used for mutual exclusiveness, though.

pyon

pewpau: I don't.

pewpau

quux: the 2x2->2 thing?

quux

yeah

pyon

pewpau: Well, I have a bachelor's degree in systems engineering, whatever that might be. But I don't think much of it.

(Action) considers his university years effectively wasted.

(Action) considers his university years effectively wasted.

adsc

you can screw a computer together and install windows on it!

pewpau

quux: well, there's xor as well. Regarding -->, it could have been defined in another way for not the reason you stated. The question was why. pyon gave a good explanation

ovrh

Hello

quux

ok just contributing another viewpoint

beaky

i love windows