Perplexed in Peoria  wrote or quoted:

> I think that Dawkins is talking about Kolmogorov complexity here.  To
> my mind, the key point about Kolmogorov complexity is that it insists
> that the language used to describe the object must be rich enough to
> say things like "repeat N times" and more complicated
variations of that
> phrase. [...]

So we have to refer to "length of description in some language" as
something like "generalised Kolmogorov complexity" - while
"Kolmogorov 
complexity" refers to only "length of description in some Turing-
complete language"?

If so, that has the blahs :-(
-- 
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim{at}tt1lock.org  Remove lock to reply.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 7/28/04 6:06:56 AM