From: owner-frc-digest
To: frc-digest@nvg.unit.no
Subject: frc-digest V1 #84
Reply-To: frc
Errors-To: owner-frc-digest
Precedence: bulk
frc-digest Wednesday, 11 January 1995 Volume 01 : Number 084
Oops
Round 29 Ends
Re: Round 29 Ends
Re: Round 29 Ends
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: blahedo@quincy.edu (Don Blaheta)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 10:05:39 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Oops
Darn. What with returning to school and unpacking, I totally forgot to
make a Rule. ;\ Oh well... maybe next time...
(Incidentally, when the Judge-Wizard posts the times of eligibility, would
e *please* say what Time Zone they are for?!)
Vanyel
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Don Blaheta | GAT d?(--) H+ s-:- g-(+) p?>! !au a-- w+ v+ C++(+++) USL
blahedo@quincy.edu| !3 E--- N++ K- W--- M++ !v -po+ Y+ t++>+++ 5- jx R(+) G+
dblaheta@aol.com | tv-- b+++ D--- B-- e(*)(+>+++) u++ h(*) f+ r-- n---- !y*
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
------------------------------
From: Oerjan Johansen
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 17:33:29 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Round 29 Ends
On Tue, 10 Jan 1995, Don Blaheta wrote:
> Darn. What with returning to school and unpacking, I totally forgot to
> make a Rule. ;\ Oh well... maybe next time...
Too bad - maybe we should have made the Break 4 Weeks.
> (Incidentally, when the Judge-Wizard posts the times of eligibility, would
> e *please* say what Time Zone they are for?!)
1) I am not Wizard.
2) Whoops. I thought I had mentioned that in the file, but no.
It was Norwegian time. Anyhow, it doesn't matter any more, as
we have a Winner.
**************************
* Round 29 *
* Theme: Logic *
* Judge: Oerjan Johansen *
* Wizard: Doug R. Steen *
**************************
The Winner and next Judge is: Stein Kulseth
The Wizard is: Stein Kulseth
====
Style Points
====
Wizard Doug R. Steen 0.5
Jeremy D. Selengut 0
Joshua Howard 0
Peter Sarrett -1
Ronald Kunne 1
Stein Kulseth 3.5
Stephen Turner 1.5
Vanyel -2.5
****
Holiday Break Overrule:
====
R.O. overrule 29:a. The FRC will take a Christmas break from Friday December
16th 1994 0:01 Norwegian time (Thursday December 15th 1994 23:01 GMT)
until Friday January 6th 1995 0:01 Norwegian time (Thursday January 5th 1995
23:01 GMT). Any actions carried out during this time will be deemed to have
no effect on the FRC, even if they were done before this R.O. overrule came
into force: for example any rules or calls for votes posted during this time
will be ignored. All periods of time mentioned in the R.O.s, except those
relating to the length of votes on R.O. overrules, will be measured ignoring
the time during the break.
====
FOR:
Stephen Turner
Stein Kulseth
Vanyel
Joshua Howard
Wizard Dug
Doug Chatham
Storm
Oerjan Johansen
====
AGAINST:
Peter Sarrett
Ronald Kunne
****
List of Rules (All times are Norwegian time, GMT+1)
****
Fantasy Rule 29:1
Wizard Doug R. Steen, Mon Dec 12 08:39:09 1994
VALID, 1/2 Point
====
FAxiom 29.1.1: All valid fantasy rules this round will contain _only_ a list
of uniquely labeled Fantasy Statements (FStatements) which are
consistent with the FStatements from previous valid
fantasy rules.
FAxiom 29.1.2: All FStatements will have exactly _one_ FValue.
FAxiom 29.1.3: Any FStatement which is not demonstrated to have a certain
FValue does _not_ have that FValue.
FAxiom 29.1.4: FAxioms, FLemmas, FTheorems, and FMethods are all FStatements.
FAxiom 29.1.5: Frue (F) and Talse (T) are FValues.
FMethod 29.1.1: If an FStatement starts with the same three words as an
FStatement which is known to be Frue, then it too is Frue.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:2
Peter Sarrett, Mon Dec 12 10:19:18 1994
VALID, -1/2 Point
====
FAxiom 29.2.1: FStatements which assign values to themselves, other
statements, or other classes, categories, or types of statements must be
FMethods. Nothing else may be an FMethod, and FMethods may be nothing else.
FAxiom 29.2.2: FStatements which define, restrict, or otherwise relate to
the form or construction of FLogic (including the definition of terms)
must be FAxioms. Nothing else may be an FAxiom, and FAxioms may be
nothing else.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:3
Peter Sarrett, Mon Dec 12 11:44:24 1994
VALID, -1/2 Point
====
FAxiom 29.3.1: FVariables are any symbols used to represent FValues.
FAxiom 29.3.2: FOperations are processes involving the change,
manipulation, or evaluation of FValues (or the FVariables representing
them). FOperations evaluate to an FValue, called the FResult.
FAxiom 29.3.3: FOperands are symbols used to represent FOperations.
FAxiom 29.3.4: FValues must be declared in an FAxiom before
they may be used in other FStatements. Stating that something is an
FValue declares that FValue.
FAxiom 29.3.5: FOperands must be defined in an FAxiom before they may be
used in other FStatements. Defining an FOperand consists of naming the
FOperation that FOperand performs, providing a symbol for the FOperand,
and defining the FOperation.
FAxiom 29.3.6: FOperations must be defined in an FAxiom before they may
be used in other FStatements. Defining an FOperation consists of
providing a format or series of formats showing how the operation is
used, and providing a set of FResults and/or an English description
such that for all possible FValues to which the FOperation might be applied,
the resulting FResults can be determined.
FAxiom 29.3.7: Floyd is an FValue.
FMethod 29.3.1: All FAxioms have an FValue of Floyd.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:4
Vanyel, Mon Dec 12 17:21:53 1994
INVALID, -1.5 Point
====
FAxiom 29.4.1: FP and FQ are FVariables.
FAxiom 29.4.2: Frue, Talse, and Floyd are the only valid FValues, and may
be abbreviated as follows:
Frue Fr
Talse Ta
Floyd Fl
FMethod 29.4.3: Only Axioms may have the FValue "Floyd".
FAxiom 29.4.4: The operand '===' is representative of the FOperation FEqual,
which is defined as follows:
P Q P === Q
Fl Fl Fl
Fl Fr Ta
Fl Ta Ta
Fr Fl Ta
Fr Fr Fr
Fr Ta Ta
Ta Fl Ta
Ta Fr Ta
Ta Ta Fr
It (===) is used to show whether P and Q are identical,
and whether one of them is axiomatic.
FAxiom 29.4.5: The operand '(+)' is representative of the FOperation FXor,
which is defined as follows:
P Q P === Q
Fl Fl Ta
Fl Fr Fr
Fl Ta Fl
Fr Fl Fr
Fr Fr Ta
Fr Ta Fr
Ta Fl Fl
Ta Fr Fr
Ta Ta Ta
It ((+)) is used to show whether P and Q are different,
and whether one of them is Frue.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:5
Vanyel, Mon Dec 12 19:30:48 1994
VALID, -1 Point
====
FAxiom 29.5.1: P and Q are FVariables.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:6
Stephen Turner, Mon Dec 12 20:18:49 1994
VALID, 1.5 Points
====
FAxiom 29.6.1: There are two FOperations called FLeft and FRight, that
can operate on any finite number of FValues. They are denoted
FL(FV0, FV1, ...) and FR(FV0, FV1, ...) where FV1, FV2, ... are the
FValues the FOperations are operating upon.
The FResult of these FOperations is determined as follows. The number of
Frue's in the argument list minus the number of Talse's plus the sum of the
positions of all the Floyd's (starting with the initial argument being
reckoned as at postion 0) is calculated, and if the result is congruent to
1 modulo 3 then the FRight Foperation has Fvalue Talse, and FLeft has Fvalue
Floyd; if the result is congruent to 2 modulo 3, FRight takes the Fvalue
Floyd, and FLeft takes Frue; and if the result is congruent to 0 modulo 3,
FRight has FValue Frue, and FLeft has the FValue Talse.
For example, FR(Fr) has FValue Ta
FR(Ta) has FValue Fl
and FR(Fl) has FValue Fr;
FL(Fr) has FValue Fl
FL(Ta) has FValue Fr
and FL(Fl) has FValue Ta.
FAxiom 29.6.2: All FStatements in valid fantasy rules are considered to be
true for the purpose of playing the fantasy rules game, whatever their
FValue.
FAxiom 29.6.3: All future valid fantasy rules will give the FValue of some
FStatement in an earlier valid fantasy rule: furthermore, the FStatement
must be one for which the FValue could not be deduced from previous
information. If, however, a fantasy rule's being declared valid would mean
that there was some player who had no such FStatements available to eim if
e were to try and construct the next fantasy rule, that fantasy rule shall
be declared invalid.
FMethod 29.6.4: FMethod 29.1.1 has the FValue Frue.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:7
Joshua Howard, Mon Dec 12 22:10:24 1994
INVALID, 0 Points
====
FMethod 29.1.2: All undefined FStatments have an FValue of Null (N).
****
Fantasy Rule 29:8
Vanyel, Tue Dec 13 01:10:53 1994
VALID, 0 Points
====
FAxiom 29.8.1: All FValues may be abbreviated by using the first two letters
of that FValue. For example, "Frue" may be abbreviated "Fr".
No two FValues have the same first two letters.
FAxiom 29.8.2: The FOperand '===' represents the FOperation FEqual, and is
defined as follows:
P === Q is Fl iff P is Floyd and Q is Floyd. Otherwise,
if P and Q have the same FValue, P === Q is Frue. If P
and Q do not have the same FValue, P === Q is Talse.
e.g. if P is Frue and Q is Floyd, P === Q is Talse. If
P is Talse and Q is Talse, P === Q is Frue.
FAxiom 29.8.3: The FOperand '(+)' represents the FOperation FXor, and is
defined as follows:
P (+) Q is Talse if P and Q have the same FValue. If one
of P or Q is Frue and the other is not, P (+) Q is Frue.
If P and Q are not the same, and neither is Frue, then
P (+) Q is Floyd.
e.g. if P is Frue and Q is Floyd, P (+) Q is Frue. If
P and Q are both Talse, P (+) Q is Talse also.
FMethod 29.8.1: FMethod 29.3.1 is Frue.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:9
Ronald Kunne, Wed Dec 14 13:15:08 1994
INVALID, 1 Point
====
FTheorem 29.9.1: There are exactly three FValues.
FProof: From previous FStatements we know that there are
at least three FValues. Assume that there are more than three.
The FAxiom 29.8.2 and 29.8.3 would have given incomplete definitions
for the FEqual and FXor Foperations. These FAxioms would therefore
have been inconsistent and Rule 29:8 Invalid.
However, Judge Oerjan judged Rule 29:8 Valid: contradiction.
FAxiom 29.9.1: All future valid fantasy rules shall contain an
FTheorem and its FProof.
FMethod 29.9.1: The FValue of all FMethods given in valid Fantasy Rules
are Frue.
****
Fantasy Rule 29:10
Stein Kulseth, Wed Dec 14 13:57:52 1994
VALID, 2 Points
====
FMethod 29.9.1 If an FStatement ends with the same three words
as another FStatement, then either both are
Floyd, or one has the FValue Talse and the
other has the FValue Frue.
FAxiom 29.9.1 FTheorems consists of a series of dots (.),
dashes (-), x-es (x), and/or bars (|) enclosed
in angle brackets (<>). Each symbol within the
brackets is considered a word.
FAxiom 29.9.2 FTheorems must be deduceable from FAxioms and/or
FLemmas.
FAxiom 29.9.3 <.> and are FTheorems
FTheorem 29.9.1 <.>
FTheorem 29.9.2
FMethod 29.9.2 FTheorem 29.9.1 is Frue and FTheorem 29.9.2 is
Talse
****
Fantasy Rule 29:11
Jeremy D. Selengut, Wed Dec 14 19:38:54 1994
INVALID, 0 Points
====
FAxiom 29.10.1 All FStatements in valid fantasy rules have
associated FLabels
FAxiom 29.10.2 No two FStatements have the same FLabel
FTitle 29.10.1 FAxiom 29.10.2 is known as the FLabel
Exclusion Principle
FAxiom 29.10.3 FLabels consist of an uninterrupted string
of four digits preceded by one square left-
hand bracket and followed by one square
right-hand bracket
FAxiom 29.10.4 The first two digits of all FLabels
represent the identity of the valid fantasy
rule in which the FStatement is included.
The fist digit represents the tens, the
second digit, the units. Valid fantasy
rule are numbered in sequence with no
numbers skipped
FAxiom 29.10.5 The third digit of all FLabels represents
the type of FStatement with which the FLabel
is associated
FAxiom 29.10.6 The final digit of all FLabels resolves
ambiguity among multiple FStatements of the
same type within the same fantasy rule. The
first FStatement of a type will be assigned
the digit '0' and following ones will be
assigned digits in sequence
FExample 29.10.1 The FLabel associated with the second
FAxiom in the ninth valid fantasy rule
would be [0901]
FTheorem 29.10.1 There cannot be more than 10 FStatements of
the same type in a single fantasy rule
FProof 29.10.1 Hypothesize that there exists eleven FAxioms
in the Nth valid fantasy rule. The first
ten such FStatements will have the FLabels
(in sequence):
[nn00],[nn01],...,[nn08],[nn09]
Since there are only ten digits there is no
possible unique FLabel for the eleventh
FAxiom. By FAxioms 29.10.1 and 2,
therefore, an eleventh FStatement of a
single type within one fantasy rule is
impossible
FMethod 29.10.1 The FValue of FTheorem 29.9.1 is Talse
****
Fantasy Rule 29:12
Stein Kulseth, Thu Dec 15 15:48:07 1994
VALID, 1.5 Points
====
FAxiom 29.12.1 Iff P is the FValue of an FTheorem and Q is also
the FValue of an FTheorem, and P === Q is Frue,
then the symbolstring of the P-FValued Ftheorem
may be concatenated by a dash (-) to the symbol-
string of the Q-FValued FTheorem to form a new
FTheorem.
FAxiom 29.12.2 Iff P is the FValue of an FTheorem and Q is also
the FValue of an FTheorem, and P (+) Q is Frue,
then the symbolstring of the P-FValued Ftheorem
may be concatenated by a bar (|) to the symbol-
string of the Q-FValued FTheorem to form a new
FTheorem.
FTheorem 29.12.1 <.-.>
FTheorem 29.12.2 <.|x>
FMethod 29.12.1 FMethod 29.8.1 has the FValue Talse
****
Fantasy Rule 29:13
Ronald Kunne, Thu Dec 15 18:46:34 1994
INVALID, 0 Points
====
FAxiom 29.10.1 : Let ? be any symbol or string of symbols.
If is Frue, then <.?.> is Frue, but is Talse.
FTheorem 29.10.1: <...> is Frue.
FProof: Apply FAxiom 29.10.1 on FTtheorem 29.9.1 (from Stein's
Rule)
FAxiom 29.10.1: All future valid fantasy rules shall contain an
FTheorem and its FProof.
FMethod 29.10.1: The FValue of all FMethods given in Fantasy Rules
with a number greater than or equal to 4 are Frue.
****
------------------------------
From: KUNNE@crnvma.cern.ch
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 17:49:31 WET
Subject: Re: Round 29 Ends
Winner or not, I propose we redo this Round.
I think it was thoroughly spoiled by the Xmas-break.
In two ways, at least: some of us were not physically present and the
others not mentally.
Therefore: what about string-calculus as theme for the next round?
(Or is it called Lambda-calculus?)
The chapter about Mu in our Bible (yes, I am refering to Hofstadter) is
an example.
Ronald
------------------------------
From: Oerjan Johansen
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 20:24:39 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Re: Round 29 Ends
On Tue, 10 Jan 1995 KUNNE@crnvma.cern.ch wrote:
> Winner or not, I propose we redo this Round.
>
> I think it was thoroughly spoiled by the Xmas-break.
> In two ways, at least: some of us were not physically present and the
> others not mentally.
>
>
> Therefore: what about string-calculus as theme for the next round?
> (Or is it called Lambda-calculus?)
Why not? Although I don't quite see it yet.
> The chapter about Mu in our Bible (yes, I am refering to Hofstadter) is
> an example.
There is also Combinator Calculus, in which you use the two functions
(Combinators)
K(x)(y)=x
and
S(x)(y)(z)=(x(z))(y(z))
to express Lambda Calculus without variables at all.. I thought of
making a programming language based on it, to compete with Intercal :-)
Now that would be an idea, creating a programming language..
> Ronald
Greetings,
Oerjan.
------------------------------
End of frc-digest V1 #84
************************