Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grzybowski's paradox

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Luna Santin 19:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grzybowski's paradox

Seems to be original research or some very minor (and likely unnamed) paradox. There were no references given. Google searches for the term bring up nothing, and Google searches for Grzybowski math paradox and Grzybowski math bring up a Polish math professor, but nothing relevant to the topic. --Wafulz 23:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into List of paradoxes. Delete Leibniz 23:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unverified. Turing discusses this error in his 1936 paper on computable numbers and does not cite it to anyone. Gazpacho 07:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and do not merge. The content is already discussed under computable numbers, and crediting it to Grzybowski is questionable. 192.75.48.150 12:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with the article on computable numbers - this paradox is not discussed there at present.If Turing considered this paradox, credit it to him. Has anybody found a non-trivial solution of this paradox? (The trivial solution is assuming that the set of all computable numbers does not exist). HTG.
- It's discussed in the first paragraph under "Properties". Please do not add dubious theoretical claims to Wikipedia. Gazpacho 18:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Countability of computable numbers is stated, as well as the fact that Cantor's diagonal argument cannot be used to obtain un uncountable set of computable numbers, but the paradox is not discussed. HTG.
  - About each algorithm there is a unique truth as to whether it generates the n-th digit of a computable real number when given n. So it is possible to form an ordered list of computable real numbers. When such a list is given, Cantor's diagonal procedure gives the n-th digit of a number not from the list in finite time, so the reals generated in this way are computable. This fact should not be interpreted as uncountability of computable real numbers. HTG.
- Sorry, no. A program either computes a number or doesn't, but you can't decide that computationally. Also, no source.Gazpacho 08:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Gazpacho. Here is circumstantial evidence that this is OR: the article's creator, User:HTG, has also made unusual edits elsewhere, such as this one in Luminiferous aether. It may be just a coincidence, but there is a physicist named H. Tomasz Grzybowski who is at the Toruń Centre for Astronomy at Nicolaus Copernicus University in Poland. Michael Kinyon 12:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.