Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Yessenin-Volpin explicitly states that feasible numbers s... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Feasible numbers should not be regarded as closed under exponentiation.

    Yessenin-Volpin explicitly states that feasible numbers should not be closed under exponentiation.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Feasible numbers should not be regarded as closed under exponentiation.The paradigmatic examples of infeasible numbers put forward by strict finitists ...Van Dantzig holds that feasible numbers are closed under addition and multiplica...

    Similar

    Yessenin-Volpin explicitly states that feasible numbers should not be ...99%Yessenin-Volpin (1970) explicitly stated that feasible numbers should ...95%Van Dantzig holds that feasible numbers are closed under addition and ...94%Van Dantzig holds feasible numbers are closed under addition and multi...92%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: computational-complexity
    View source passageHide passage
    [53] And from this it follows that such orders cannot be reached from below by a sorties-like sequence of feasible orders of growth \(O(1) \prec O(n) \prec O(n^2) \prec O(n^3) \ldots\) When analyzed according to the Cobham-Edmonds thesis, it hence appears that the ‘naive’ notion of feasible computability does not suffer from the sort of instability which Dummett takes to plague the notion of a feasibly constructible number. These observations point to another theme within the writings of some st

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective