Thank you for sharing your discussions based on your slides. The professor teaching this course at my university doesn't teach this course in a way that is helpful, so I hardly understood the material. I was so frustrated when I understood that the class didn't have to be as difficult or unintelligible as it is at my university, and that people actually enjoyed this course. I eventually found your channel when searching for help with the course online and I couldn't be happier.
Could we use the regular Atm to proof the contradiction instead of the ETm?That would also require a small tweak to the "w" where "w" will equal to the symmetric of the two languages we testing for equality. So, w = language of M1 intersection language of M2, that's the set of strings that both languages is expected to reject if they are equal. Remember, that an equality is not tight to the test of alphabet testing, it could be a testing for two graphs equality where each graph is constructed using the same set of alphabet but results different figure. Finally, if we could create a subroutine R that decides for symmetric equality, then we could decide for Atm and that concludes to a contradiction.
Thank you for sharing your discussions based on your slides. The professor teaching this course at my university doesn't teach this course in a way that is helpful, so I hardly understood the material. I was so frustrated when I understood that the class didn't have to be as difficult or unintelligible as it is at my university, and that people actually enjoyed this course. I eventually found your channel when searching for help with the course online and I couldn't be happier.
You are awesome, Sir.
Your presentation is lucid, to the point and following proper leveling of abstractions.
Thanks a lot for these videos.I've tried many books for Theory of computation but your videos have been the ultimate guide.Greetings from India Sir :)
Could we use the regular Atm to proof the contradiction instead of the ETm?That would also require a small tweak to the "w" where "w" will equal to the symmetric of the two languages we testing for equality. So, w = language of M1 intersection language of M2, that's the set of strings that both languages is expected to reject if they are equal. Remember, that an equality is not tight to the test of alphabet testing, it could be a testing for two graphs equality where each graph is constructed using the same set of alphabet but results different figure.
Finally, if we could create a subroutine R that decides for symmetric equality, then we could decide for Atm and that concludes to a contradiction.
Could you do this for comparing a TM with a DFA?
Thanks sir
I want you unify the way of writing M? Your M sometimes seems small m. Just saying.