jontxu

It was ironic

Lasal

rindolf; the oil has been thrown, all that remains is for you to escape into the wilderness

quux

this lasal thing was trolling in #math too

can someone ban it?

they are trying to stir up trouble and cause fights

can someone ban it?

they are trying to stir up trouble and cause fights

pyon

!ops -- what quux just said

nitrix

2 secs

Lasal

only the lifeless degenerate deploys !ops

i shall leave

please let me do so, nitrix

do not consult the hammer

for I will leave myself

goodbye my dear friends

i shall leave

please let me do so, nitrix

do not consult the hammer

for I will leave myself

goodbye my dear friends

_blizzy_

can anyone help me with a windows script?

snyp

he's like an RPG npc

rindolf

_blizzy_: in whicih language?

thecha

_blizzy_ try get-help

quux

they were being really creeping in #math

i wonder what other channel they were trolling in

i wonder what other channel they were trolling in

thecha

_blizzy_ use the get-help comandlet

_blizzy_

rindolf, um, IDK what langauge this is https://gist.github.com/anonymous/a21e33f708e6fccaff00

Im trying to reverse the script

Im trying to reverse the script

thecha

_blizzy_ as in run the comands in reversed order?

_blizzy_

thecha, as in to make it so as if the script was never ran in the first place

thecha

oh

rindolf

_blizzy_: it looks like Windows Batch.

thecha

rindofl why dont i have to look beyond the square root?

pewpau

why is the comma , used to denote "such that"? What authority enforced everybody else to use it?

thecha

rindolf

rindolf

thecha: because if x = a * b then either a < sqrt(x) or b < sqrt(x)

nitrix

Had to read the backlog. Calling people lifeless with ADHD does it for me. Being a general annoyance wouldn't.

thecha

heh

rindolf

thecha: well, s/</<=/g

thecha

rindolf i know what you meant

and it makes sense

and it makes sense

rindolf

thecha: :-)

thecha

rindolf sadly this wont help me form a bottom up aproach :D

pewpau

thecha: roar.

rindolf

thecha: BTW, Unix has a factor command.

thecha: why not ?

thecha: why not ?

thecha

and i just guesstimated this program in it s orignal formthe one oyu saw woudl run over a weaak to a month-ish

becasue if you start with the small primes and aproache th ebiggest from their side you need to go past the sqr()

becasue if you start with the small primes and aproache th ebiggest from their side you need to go past the sqr()

Twey

pewpau: IME the full-stop is more common.

rindolf

thecha: no.

thecha: if you went past the sqrt (of the number you have left), then you know it's a prime.

thecha: if you went past the sqrt (of the number you have left), then you know it's a prime.

Twey

pewpau: Comma is generally used for conjunction

thecha

ohh

rindolf i see now :)

rindolf i see now :)

rindolf

thecha: you're welcome . :-)

nitrix

pyon: © good job!

thecha

ty :O)

pyon

nitrix: credit goes to quux

anyway hungreh

anyway hungreh

nitrix

Yeah I was doing the same. Silly humans and their need to eat all the time.

Twey

nitrix: Not *all* the time. Be thankful you're not a cow.

thecha

you can substitute food with drink

only drink milk for example

mixed wiht blood

as some peopels do

only drink milk for example

mixed wiht blood

as some peopels do

nitrix

thecha: So, Soylent?

thecha

lol

njcomsec

soylent smoothie

jontxu

The actual smoothie is Joylent, I think.

pewpau

alright, so when I'm implementing ISA on microchips from scratch with transistors and it works, we can say that I more or less know what I'm doing. I have faith in my knowledge there. But then, when it comes to "proof by contradiction" in mathematics I do know that it's a valid way to prove things (within its scope). Yet, I have to admit that I have no idea why/how it works more than from an abstract point of view. I put that in contrast to what

I know about microchips where I even know the stuff down to the qunatum mechanics behind them. How do you get such "faith" in the craft in mathematics?

I suppose its built upon the formal system, but I can't just trust it blindly

I know about microchips where I even know the stuff down to the qunatum mechanics behind them. How do you get such "faith" in the craft in mathematics?

I suppose its built upon the formal system, but I can't just trust it blindly

quux

well the assumption is that everything is true or not true

so proof by contradiction is founded on a case analysis

if its true then its true

if it's false then ... derive a contradiction to show that this case was impossible

so proof by contradiction is founded on a case analysis

if its true then its true

if it's false then ... derive a contradiction to show that this case was impossible

Twey

pewpau: All mathematical proofs are contingent on the consistency of the logic

(apart from some trivial logics)

(apart from some trivial logics)

pewpau

that makes sense, yes

there's something awefully intuitive in proof by deduction. But then, it was intuitive to beleive that the sky was filled with water 1500 years ago. How do you gain faith in natural deduction? (wow, just having faith is so much easier than actually thinking)

there's something awefully intuitive in proof by deduction. But then, it was intuitive to beleive that the sky was filled with water 1500 years ago. How do you gain faith in natural deduction? (wow, just having faith is so much easier than actually thinking)

Twey

pewpau: So a proof ¬A by contradiction is a proof that if A, then ¥, where ¥ is some proposition known to be false in the logic if the logic is consistent (usually just the trivial proposition with no proofs)

quux

when you say faith in natural deduction, what do you mean exactly?

Twey

pewpau: Natural deduction is a proof system, a system for writing down logics, rather than a logic per se

pewpau

quux: faith is just the lazy way of accepting something, so not exactly faith. I mean, few of us actually know the actual science behind what's holding our houses up. But we have "faith" in that it won't fall appart (for good reasons).

quux

for example I know it doesn't apply to real world propositions - it only works for mathematically precise statements

pewpau

Twey: hm, I think I'm attributing natural deduction some kind of truth it not necessarily posses. The rules that makes natural deduction possible is simply defined as it is.. hm wait, gotta think

I mean, natural deduction neither works or doesn't, it is what it is and it works within its own theory?

I mean, natural deduction neither works or doesn't, it is what it is and it works within its own theory?

quux

well it does work, it's extremely effective

Twey

pewpau: It's an interesting question. In practice we generally gain trust in a foundational logic by using it for a long time and not running into any tautological contradictions. Sometimes that turns out not to be the case (e.g. Russell's paradox) and we refine the logic to rule out those cases.

quux

there are a lot of finite objects we have a lot of direct experience with like integers

Twey

pewpau: Of course, if we have trust in one logic, we can often prove a different logic consistent in that logic

And thus transfer the trust

And thus transfer the trust

quux

and we have used mathematical reasoning to discover all kinds of things about them which has turned out true in practice

pyon

Don't type safety theorems subsume consistency proofs?

Twey

pyon: I don't think so

n1751

hello

quux

you need type saftey and strong normalization

Twey

Yeah

And a sufficiently interesting notion of type-safety

Well, for it to do the same sort of jo

b

And a sufficiently interesting notion of type-safety

Well, for it to do the same sort of jo

b

n1751

i'm a beginner, i don't know very well how to use this chat.

pyon

n1751: Just chat. And ask programming questions if you have any. :-)

Twey

n1751: Hello. You type things and press enter.

n1751

yeah, i have some question to ask, but i'm not sure that are question right about programming.

jontxu

Just ask, we won't eat you