Re: Source Code for OS?

[russotto@wanda.pond.com (Matthew Russotto)]

In article <3A8394B9.876A9F1F@qwest.net>, olcott  <olcott@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>
>Quantum_Cat wrote:
>>
>>  *>Essentially that Kurt goofed is his famous incompleteness theorem.
>>
>> Pope Cooter the Looter's Precise and Definitive Law of Infallible Assertion
>> again.  Got it.  ;)
>>
>
>I could be wrong on this, but, I don't think so.
>are you familiar with the math involved is proving
>that algorithms are correct? 

I am, or more precisely was.  Unfortunately the math involved in
proving the algorithm correct was, in my experience, always more
complex and error-prone than the algorithm itself.  Seemed like a dead
end to me at the time.

>Its based in mathematical
>induction which does not suffer from the same
>limitations of logical induction... I can extrapolate
>the data structure for the universal set of knowledge.
>If it was based on graphs that can contain cycles,
>Godel may have been correct, yet I have shown
>that it is not based on graphs such as these...
>People with enough education will be familiar
>enough with this terminology to realize that
>there might be some truth in this claim...

I'm familiar with the terminology but the way you are putting it
together appears to be babble.

-- 
Matthew T. Russotto                                russotto@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue."