I imagine most of you have heard of the busy beaver game. It's the aim of creating a Turing machine that runs as long as possible without being infinite. But you might not know it's being ferociously researched right now.https://wiki.bbchallenge.org/wiki/Main_PageBasically, this collaborative project is aiming at finding values of the BB function and ruling out cases. BB(3,3) has what's called a "Cryptid" - a Collatz-like function. https://wiki.bbchallenge.org/wiki/CryptidsAdditionally, the current candidate for BB(6) has a LOWER BOUND of [math]10 \uparrow\uparrow 10 \uparrow\uparrow 10 \uparrow\uparrow 8.10237[/math]. As an amusing aside, if ZFC is inconsistent, then a machine devoted to finding a ZFC contradiction could be made that would halt after at most BB(410) steps. Source: https://codeberg.org/ajwade/turing_machine_explorer
(The pic is outdated, ZFC has been lowered from 432 to 410. https://wiki.bbchallenge.org/wiki/Logical_independence hasn't' been updated with the codeberg update yet.)
>>17061230What a cool fucking thread outside my expertise, thank you for sharing!
>If ZFC is inconsistent not only will we never know, no civilization possible in the observable universe would knowKind of fucking terrifying
Chat solved Busy Beaver.Well, almost. It’s stuck at 98%.But last month it was only 47%, so “Progress”.
>>17061875Some say this has already happened; twice.
>>17061230>lower bound that highwhat the fuck is going on with this function?
>>17061230What's up with that 0=1 line up there? Is that meant to be "inconsistent with choice"?
>>17064423yep, reinhardt cardinal or something
>>17061230World’s oldest profession.
>>17064543Counting?
>>17064729Busying beavers
>>17064768For purposes of later counting, once they’ve finished.
>>17064729Counting anything you do that someone would metonymize you as and pay you for.
>>17064768nice