… in regard to his article “Expected Algorithmic Specified Complexity”
Question 1. Is your definition of algorithmic specified complexity precisely equivalent to the definition given by Ewert, Dembski, and Marks in “Algorithmic Specified Complexity,”
even though you write in place of ?
Question 2. The identity follows from your definition of algorithmic specified complexity. Is the following extension of your inequality (43) correct?
Question 3. You refer to the upper bound on fASC as “conservation of complexity for ASC,” so you evidently regard fASC as algorithmic specified complexity (ASC). I observe that
where denotes the probability distribution of the random variable Have I correctly expressed fASC as algorithmic specified complexity?
It follows from the foregoing that your “conservation of complexity” is equivalent to
As explained in “The Old Switcheroo,” it is absurd to change from one ASC measure to another, and speak of conservation.