You're replying to a comment by Bill Carson.

Bill Carson Permalink
November 23, 2011, 22:30

Wrong! There is no evidence to conclude that the Ackermann function is slower growing than the Busy Beaver Sigma.
The fact that a function is not computable doesn't necessarily mean it needs to be fast growing (e.g. convert the halting problem to a function that returns a boolean: not very fast growing, is it?)

Reply To This Comment

(why do I need your e-mail?)

(Your twitter name, if you have one. (I'm @pkrumins, btw.))

Type the word "floppy": (just to make sure you're a human)

Please preview the comment before submitting to make sure it's OK.