Timeline for Computability Theory Notation For Entering A Set At A Stage
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 28, 2019 at 3:54 | comment | added | Peter Gerdes | Ahh, ok I got confused by the timing. Thanks! Now to actually finish the proof instead of playing online. | |
| Jul 28, 2019 at 3:52 | comment | added | Noah Schweber | @PeterGerdes Re: your first comment, yes - my opening was responding to the original edit of the question where "$W_s$" stood for the $s$th stage in the enumeration of the c.e. set $W$. Re: your second comment, I don't think so but I could of course be wrong. | |
| Jul 28, 2019 at 3:45 | comment | added | Peter Gerdes | No I’m not doing automorphisms of ce sets anymore, thank god. Anyway I'm just curious above if you think there is some aspect that is lost by using the dual approach of having $W_e$ stand for both the c.e. set and the domain of the partiall function. I remember one weird case where I needed different indexing systems for the two kinds of objects to make my requirements simpler but that was an unusual case. | |
| Jul 28, 2019 at 3:44 | comment | added | Peter Gerdes | Thanks for the suggestion on notation but I’m confused why you think there is tension with it being the domain of the e-th ce function. Computable enumerable sets are the domains of c.e functions. Writing it as a set is just a way of ignoring the value the function takes on (only if it converges). Enumerating an element x into a ce set is just a way of saying your partial function converges at x | |
| Jul 28, 2019 at 3:40 | vote | accept | Peter Gerdes | ||
| Jul 27, 2019 at 22:16 | history | answered | Noah Schweber | CC BY-SA 4.0 |