One way to prove that the set of all languages that are not recursively enumerable is not countable is by using a diagonalization argument. This involves assuming that the set is countable and then constructing a language that is not in the set, leading to a contradiction. This contradiction shows that the set of all languages that are not recursively enumerable is uncountable.
The complement of a regular language is regular because regular languages are closed under complementation. This means that if a language is regular, its complement is also regular.
The reverse of a regular language is regular because for every string in the original language, there exists a corresponding string in the reversed language that is also regular. This is because regular languages are closed under the operation of reversal, meaning that if a language is regular, its reverse will also be regular.
Yes, it is possible to prove that the clique problem is NP-complete.
No. You can only state correctness to a degree of certainty. That degree might be very high, particularly for a very short routine, but no one can prove correctness to 100%.
Use your credit card to prove your identity.
prove that every metric space is hausdorff and first countable
here is the proof: http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/ProductOfAFiniteNumberOfCountableSetsIsCountable.html
Proof By Contradiction:Claim: R\Q = Set of irrationals is countable.Then R = Q union (R\Q)Since Q is countable, and R\Q is countable (by claim), R is countable because the union of countable sets is countable.But this is a contradiction since R is uncountable (Cantor's Diagonal Argument).Thus, R\Q is uncountable.
It isn't possible to prove because Sanskrit isn't the mother of all languages; Sanskrit is descended from Proto-Indian-Iranian, However, Sanskrit is one of the oldest languages that is still in use.
The complement of a regular language is regular because regular languages are closed under complementation. This means that if a language is regular, its complement is also regular.
I don't know if there can be found any words (because I can't find any dictionary on the Internet of a Siberian language or a Native-American one), that are the same. But there are still some languages in Siberia (Russia), that are part of the Eskimo-Aleut language family, an North-American language family, this could prove that the Eskimo-Aleut languages (and other languages in America) have there origins in Asia.
no prove....
Prove to whom? You can't "prove" a negative.
I can prove there are angels on earth.. trust in god and he will prove it to you too.
Turing Decidable Languages are both Turing Rec and Turing Co-Recognizable. If a Language is Not Turing Decidable, either it, or it's complement, must be not Recognizable.
There is little doubt that learning a foreign language will expand your views of the world, and will create associations that prove helpful. There are quite valid ways of viewing a subject. A realistic interpretation of "fire escape" is in French "Flee the fire". Perhaps a better command. And, other styles of thinking can be considered to have their own languages. Obvious examples are Mathematics, and Music.
Prove It was created in 1977.