khaled

I have a new idea about a new theoretical machine model, like Turing machine

I'll publish it soon ...

Yes, in our ordinary understanding of time, "there is no object with no time", but their could be different understanding of time. Einstein talks about time dilation which depends on the speed of an object and when an object moves at the speed of light, its time is zero. There could also be an eternal time for instance the mathematical and logical principles, are eternal, they were always right and will always be correct.

Light = Photons, Photons Speed [math]\ne \infty[/math]

Photon [math]i[/math] is in Position [math](x_1,y_1,z_1)[/math] at Time [math]t_1[/math]

Photon [math]i[/math] is in Position [math](x_2,y_2,z_2)[/math] at Time [math]t_2[/math]

I guess what you mean by "its time is zero" is: Photon's Time Flow = 0.0

Based on that, Photons are Static (doesn't change with time passing)

But, note that moving Photons crash on objects losing its motion energy .. Also, note that

Photons are converted into Thermal Energy at some cases ...

Photons are Dynamic, they change over time .. I think their Time Flow is not Zero,

but it might be relatively Zero to everything else, under the Relativity Theory ...

Time is not really a dimension, we made it a dimension to study objects over temporal intervals

.. there is no object with no time, it's like pausing the reality ...

when something occur then another thing occur you can't reverse them in time order,

time motion is continues, its flow divers between different objects, some humans

can feel its flow slower than others ...

do you secure your wireless using a secret key ..?

.. settings in both ends might not meet at some point,

you know when an atom (which spins in a direction around its origin), is spinning around an outer point,

it just looks like how a planet is moving through space in a group ...

I think the author started with an idea, then he have shown it in a wrong way ...

I think what he tried to say is this: Sometimes when we tie our fuzzy-ruled imagination to the rules of physics,

we can simulate a situation, or we can have more realistic dreams, that has some degree-of-reality ...

although I don't believe in Oracle, Oracle can be made by our brain too ...

I'm not a physician, but I have read a book on Relativity ...

There is a case that makes me more confused than anything else I thought of about Light ...

Assume a train that travels in the Speed of Light, and that the train has front-lights, also, assume

there are two persons inside the train at its both ends facing each others, and the person who

stands at the back of the train holds a light-bulk ...

I have simple questions:

1. will the front-lights of the train lights leave its light-bulbs ?

2. will anyone be able to perceive the train front-lights ?

3. will the light of the light-bulk held by the person inside the train travels through the train to the other end ?

4. can the person in the other end of the train perceive the bulk-light ?

5. what happens to both light bulbs after a time, in that particular case ?

I can't even imagine ...

If pencils are cheaper than pens, and pens are cheaper than erasers; and Peter does not have enough money to buy 5 pens; which of thefollowing will be the most appropriate answer?

 

1. a. Peter has money to buy 1 pen
2. b. Peter does not have money to buy 1 pen
3. c. Peter has money to buy 5 pencils
4. d. Peter has money to buy pencils but not enoughmoney to buy pens
5. e. Peter has enough money to buy erasers

This problem is impossible to solve,

Reasoning:

given "Peter does not have enough money to buy 5 pens", we conclude [math]M < 5 \times A[/math]

where M is Peter's Money Amount, and A is the Pen's Price

from the words "enough money", we conclude [math] 0 < M < 5 \times A [/math]

now let's say that [math]B < A[/math], where B is Pencil's Price

but, with this we cannot find out if [math]M > A[/math], or [math]M > B[/math], or [math]M < B[/math]

and thus, we cannot know how much is his money to know if Peter can buy a Pen or even a Pencil ...

I don't want to use C4.5 but SVM. It is not diffrence in this case, important for me is feature vector that represents encrypted file, and I have problems with getting this vector.

About SVM: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Support_vector_machine

Feature Extraction: in Attachments ...

No 252 - Mazibuko.pdf

Correct.

Now for the even more obscure one.

 

Suppose epsilon is a large negative integer.

[math]\epsilon << 0[/math]

It seem you have to work on this starting from building your model, after looking at the papers briefly,

I assume you have to work with C4.5 Algorithm & the Decision Tree ...

I have previously engineered complete robotic devices from scratch from etching my own printed circuit boards to building the mechanical arm. The point? No point just putting that into perspective. The robot I am developing is a bio mimetic doll that will incorporate any number of technologies as it is being developed .... This isn't too important to the topic, it was simply my indications on where I was coming from.

Don't play with words, xittenn ...

The exciting part was the idea of creating a new framework for widgets that allowed AI Agents to navigate them in an optimized, reduced cost fashion. Starting from scratch this could mean any number of things and spans across a variety of applications and frameworks from HTML to desktop applications. The first big wall that I'm seeing is how to possibly incorporate existing frameworks into such a process, especially when there are no injections across modules :/

 

I just thought this was a pretty cool little project, possibly worth mentioning ..

Welcome to Computer Science !.. we won't find things ready for us to use in our little interesting projects .. we have to

design everything, implement it ourselves, and if there is nothing that span over this variety .. we make that

span ourselves .. there is nothing that we cannot do, if planned well ...

But, things doesn't work because we just wrote a code and managed to get it working .. we have to

put our efforts in the design phase,

It's not an easy process, as you would know, you have an idea, you need Analysis, then Modelling, then Validation,

then Designing, then Implementation, then Testing, then finally Experimenting ...

so, good luck ...

there are robotic agents and robotic parts you can get .. and the parts have a manual on how

to connect them to your laptop ...

but with everything you get, the model you create in programming is

the most important part, you have to do the AI agent life-cycle, and the key

of success in this field is "did it do the right thing ?", because agents even

partial ones or game-playing .. it's all about decision making ...

good luck

Surely the first scientist should have been a physicist?

Aren't physicians are familiar with Error and Precision of Measurements ...

_____________________

Another one I read:

It wasn't long until [math]x[/math] came into the mathematics bar shouting "beware, the derivation is coming !",

everyone went to hide except one, the [math]e^x[/math], who was sitting calm on his seat.

When The derivation came into the bar, looked around, then stepped in front of the only one who remained calm,

then asked him "why are you so calm", the [math]e^x[/math] said "derivate of [math]e^x[/math] in [math]x[/math] remains [math]e^x[/math]" ...

the derivation looked at him and said "who said I'm derivation of x ?!" ...

I remember a joke I once read ...

In a coffee there were once a mathematician, a physician, and a biologist sitting on a table having coffee and chatting.

They were watching an apartment on the other side of the street. And in a minute, two men walked into the apartment,

but three came out. that's when the three scientists smiled at each others and tried to explain what happened ...

the physician said "maybe, the measurements were not precise", the biologist said "maybe, they have multiplied", but the

mathematician finished his coffee and said "when someone comes and enters, that apartment will be empty !".

Generally, a classification is done in two general ways, either by rules .. or by statistical learning\approximation ...

here is a link to some references on Mulispectral Images Classification using SVM:

- www.intechopen.com/download/pdf/pdfs_id/9501

- www.cic.unb.br/~mylene/PI_2010_2/ICIP10/pdfs/0003641.pdf

- http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=1529435

- http://spie.org/x648.html?product_id=815783

- www.gisdevelopment.net/technology/ip/ma0561.htm

- paper.ijcsns.org/07_book/200809/20080933.pdf

.. good luck

Working with algorithms, you are okay with C .. you can learn C++ to use Object-Oriented Programming ...

By looking at the syllabus .. it seem you need a decent knowledge in few fields such as Mathematics, Logic,

Algorithms, Software Engineering, and Project Management Analysis ...

for the Logic Part: http://euclid.trentu.ca/math/sb/pcml/welcome.html

good luck

We won't do your homework, we won't do your work.

Post your problem\code and we will try to help you.

PS: before posting a new thread, read the forums rules

khaled: I have made mistakes - even posted nonsense - on more one forum more than once. While embarrassing, it is a forgiveable "offence". But to claim as you did that your gibberish "requires logic" looks like arrogance. Arrogance plus mistakes are not an easy mix to digest. Please don't post if you do not really know what you are talking about.

 

Yes. Readers notice the a here, that is, not any. As I recall this is famous corollary (due to Dedekind?) to an easy thm that states that every set, finite, infinite, countable or otherwise, has a countable proper subset.

 

So let us assume as discussed that the set of all positive integers is countably infinite, and assign a symbol to the cardinality of any set that can be placed in 1-1 correspondence with this set as [math]\aleph_0[/math] (say "aleph-null"). Let's refer to this as the first transfinite cardinal, for want of a better term. So the question arises, what is the next transfinite cardinal? Since we don't yet know (or possibly care) let's call it [math]\aleph_1[/math]. How are these two cardinal numbers related?

 

Now, as shown by Cantor, using an argument identical to the one in the OP, the set [math] \mathbb{R}[/math] of real numbers is uncountably infinite (the term "infinite" is, of course redundant), and let's assign a symbol to its cardinality, say [math]\mathfrak{c}[/math]. Then it can be shown that [math]\mathfrak{c} = 2^{\aleph_0}[/math] as I hinted in the OP.

 

Question: is it truly the case that [math]\mathfrak{c} = \aleph_1 \Rightarrow \aleph_1 =2^{\aleph_0}[/math]? That is, is there or is there not a cardinal that "lies between" [math]\mathfrak{c}[/math] and [math]\aleph_0[/math]? As far as I am aware, nobody knows for sure. Poor old Cantor literally went bonkers trying for a proof of the negative.

 

PS This is the celebrated "continuum hypothesis". Anyone know if it has been proven?

I never write something I do not fully understand,

But what if the cardinality of our set is infinite? What do we make of the assertion, say, that ? Surely this is madness?

I was saying that if you make a power set of an infinite set you get another infinite set, but in a higher degree ...

we only can address the difference in degree, but both are infinite to us ...

Sorry about my "gebbrish" ...

This is nonsense.

define infinity then ...

I don't suggest playing with the infinity in mathematics .. but you should know something about infinity,

when the infinity has a direction it's an ultima, when it doesn't have a direction it's an ultimatum ...

means when we means by infinity a huge number uncountable it's an ultimatum, but when we refer

to infinity as the unlimited, the endless number that is always greater than any number then it's an ultima ...

ultima a: [math] a > x[/math], where [math]x \in \mathbb{R}[/math]

ultimatum b: [math] y > b >> x[/math], where [math]x \in \mathbb{R}[/math] and [math]y \in \mathbb{R}[/math]

for any two ultima(s) a and b [math]a = b[/math]

for any ultima a, expressions such as [math]C \times a[/math], [math]C + a[/math], .. [math]C^{a}[/math]

will all result in an ultima that is and "endless infinity" which is a constant value that is greater than any,

and any two ultima(s) will be equal because they all refer to the endlessness ...

So, if S = { S0, S1, S2, ... } an infinite set, where |S| = infinity, it means that |S| = infinity (endlessness),

and [math]2^{\infty} = \infty[/math] (endlessness) ...

it's not mad, and it requires logic ...

1000000000..0 ~ this number would be an ultimatum (huge uncountable number)

1000000000... ~ this would be an ultima (an endless number)

Boolean Algebra is the most basic algebra in mathematics, you should be able to do this ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_algebra_%28logic%29

I'll take * as AND, + as OR, and ⊕ as XOR, and ' as NOT

Following De Morgan Laws, we get the following ...

while NOT AND = OR, and NOT OR = AND

(a+a') = 1 :: always true (something can happen or not)

(a*a') = 0 :: always false (something can happen and not)

(c+a)' = c' * a'

(c⊕b)' = ( (c * b') + (c' * b) )' = (c * b')' * (c' * b)' = (c' + b) * (c + b')

we get ...

((c+a)' * (c⊕b)')' = ( (c' * a') * ((c' + b) * (c + b')) )' = (c' * a')' + ((c' + b) * (c + b'))'

= (c + a) + ( (c' + b)' + (c + b')' ) = (c + a) + ( (c * b') + (c' * b') )

= c + a + ((c * b') + (c' * b')) = c + a + (b' * (c + c'))

= c + a + b'

I see ...

My next attempt will be like this: use current readings in the next phase meta-data ...

I read free books on my iPod, using iBooks ...

1. Thomas Hariot the mathematician, the philosopher, and the scholar

2. Amusements in Mathematics

3. Logic

What complexity?

 

- class of ciphers

- nondeterministic input(your hidden variable)

- Metropolis Random Walk(PRNG)

 

Where the system quality is still limited by the class of ciphers but is made more convoluted by the nondeterministic choice in cipher(Where the choice is a member of the union of the class of ciphers where each cipher is differentiated by the statements under which they are composed.) Metropolis takes in an 'initial state' variable, the choice of this variable can be nondeterministic and the most obvious example of this would be the human choice(firm believer in free will *grin*.) This is still an example of a system in where a key is generated and this key needs to be retained should the results wish to be considered practical.

 

The chaos room suggests a direct reordering is taking place and that brings me back to my previous points which, at least to me, are pretty clear and obvious. The use of a statistician under the context I took it suggests order independence and this doesn't make sense because the consequence of this would simply be an open wound with all invited?

 

Funny place to make statements if one is so ready to shy away from conversation. I like stories and am all ears!

The idea came from reality, the feed room symbolize the entities speeches, the chaos room

symbolize the intersection, and the output room symbolize the distant person's ear ...

but to make a better model, we would instead of symbolizing every speaker as a PRNG,

we make them as an independent entities such as AI agents ...

I suggested that better model, because in this model we don't really make a hidden

variable .. but we fabricate it, but if we make independent automata then the hidden variable

will be created without fabricating it ...