Ciro Santilli @cirosantilli  40

It is quite mind blowing when you think about it, that the huge majority of your body's cells is essentially just there to support a tiny ammount of germline, which are the only cells that can actually pass on! It is fun to imagine the cell type tree for this, with a huge branching of somatic cells, and only a few germline going forward.

Originally by Keyhole Inc., which the nbecame Google Maps, but the format seems standardized and has non-Google support, so should be OK.

There are six, three in each sense, depending on where you start modulo-3.

Trying to use gallium arsenide was Seymour Cray's fatal last flaw as mentioned at The Supermen: The Story of Seymour Cray by Charles J. Murray (1997).

The Supermen: The Story of Seymour Cray by Charles J. Murray (1997) page 4 mentions:

Subset of Galilean transformation with speed equals 0.

A law of physics is Galilean invariant if the same formula works both when you are standing still on land, or when you are on a boat moving at constant velocity.

For example, if we were describing the movement of a point particle, the exact same formulas that predict the evolution of $x_{land}(t)$ must also predict $x_{boat}(t)$, even though of course both of those $x(t)$ will have different values.

It would be extremely unsatisfactory if the formulas of the laws of physics did not obey Galilean invariance. Especially if you remember that Earth is travelling extremelly fast relative to the Sun. If there was no such invariance, that would mean for example that the laws of physics would be different in other planets that are moving at different speeds. That would be a strong sign that our laws of physics are not complete.

The consequence/cause of that is that you cannot know if you are moving at a constant speed or not.

Lorentz invariance generalizes Galilean invariance to also account for special relativity, in which a more complicated invariant that also takes into account different times observed in different inertial frames of reference is also taken into account. But the fundamental desire for the Lorentz invariance of the laws of physics remains the same.

The busy beaver game consists in finding, for a given $n$, the turing machine with $n$ states that writes the largest possible number of 1's on a tape initially filled with 0's. In other words, computing the busy beaver function for a given $n$.

There are only finitely many Turing machines with $n$ states, so we are certain that there exists such a maximum. Computing the Busy beaver function for a given $n$ then comes down to solving the halting problem for every single machine with $n$ states.

Some variant definitions define it as the number of time steps taken by the machine instead. Wikipedia talks about their relationship, but no patience right now.

The Busy Beaver problem is cool because it puts the halting problem in a more precise numerical light, e.g.:

Bibliography: