Timeline for answer to Encoding prefixes of infinite sequences. by Aurora Borealis
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 hours ago | comment | added | Aurora Borealis | you were right to point that out, I made an edit to the post. | |
| 4 hours ago | history | edited | Aurora Borealis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1212 characters in body
|
| 6 hours ago | vote | accept | Heyheykhey | ||
| 8 hours ago | comment | added | Heyheykhey | It s not obvious to me in your construction it s true if: lim ln(n) - ln(sum k< n ln(k)) -> infty if im not mistaken, idk if it's true | |
| 9 hours ago | comment | added | Aurora Borealis | Yes. The same kind of construction still works, and in fact you still get probability $1$. | |
| 9 hours ago | comment | added | Heyheykhey | I read 3 times, refreshed me on borel-cantelli, and it seems on point, thank you, i will reread tomorrow to be sure. This is a bad news for what i want to archieve even if intuitively i felt it, cause i need a function i can integrate giving finite value. I would like to ask a related question: Does the result hold if we add the size of m as cost of its description, so in the definition of s_o it would be |O(m)|-|m|- ln(|m|) instead. Can i add an edit on the original question adding the new one or should i create a new question ? | |
| 10 hours ago | history | answered | Aurora Borealis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |