Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

There are always alternatives. -- Spock, "The Galileo Seven", stardate 2822.3


devel / comp.theory / Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

SubjectAuthor
* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ keyolcott
+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
 `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |+* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    ||`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    || `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    ||  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    ||   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    ||   |  `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | |     `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |     +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      |   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |       `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |   |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Jeff Barnett
    |   |        |    |      |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Jeff Barnett
    |   |        |    |      |   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |       +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |       |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |       `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |      |   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |       `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |        `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |         `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |          +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |          `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |           `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |            |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Dennis Bush
    |   |        |    |            | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |            | | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | | | +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |            | | | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            | | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |            | |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |             +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    |   |        |    |             `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |              `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |               `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |                `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |                 `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Andy Walker
    `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940
Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30743&group=comp.theory#30743

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:03:40 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:03:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<tfidnSG6b5yyN8H_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d7mf47m.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 28
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-qfbuE3ppsOj2/aZaYGlAVo0uvDk++VYs9l2esN/rI8MgofI5V/671XaiXqyJgNOUr6wLROKP6KsgW4V!458VZelMfo5HrrLw6E0lqOohJiwDGgEw/w+Ks3zjZq0DEeVK/rCJxdXTdsRH1NkZG0A41+0uzZyg
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3022
 by: olcott - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:03 UTC

On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> Read my addendum.
>
> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>

THIS IS THE ADDENDUM

On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>
> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
> switched.
>
> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
> correctly simulated input.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<8eednanDIJmVf_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30746&group=comp.theory#30746

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:00:24 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:00:23 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<beqdnWviEc-fcsT_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87zgkkldog.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w9-dnZOcu_m09Mb_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y203ka8o.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<DbGdnd1PJsR0rsH_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87o80zi8dy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<tfidnSG6b5yyN8H_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d7mf47m.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t3sii7$oil$1@dont-email.me>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t3sii7$oil$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <8eednanDIJmVf_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 65
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-fD3z1Cpjxtxfl9z/LEXMqPa0Yf2C+qmhTUslO/na4t3G9ukmNp21U6iiRsF7s4sUNFpmbhJKHzfkTrv!U3c/QaAjdMbS7aIuE3sETh5/w49FKuggW6tzDTYbk51fLGtMl1kr3lhEdS03vjD6PbDsOgJBC0/k
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5141
 by: olcott - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:00 UTC

On 4/21/2022 4:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
> On 2022-04-21 12:20, olcott wrote:
>
>> That everyone here claims that I am wrong knowing full well that they
>> have no idea what I am saying because they don't know the first thing
>> about the x86 language is still a lie.
>
> The "x86 language" (which doesn't even exist) has no relevance to
> computational theory.
>
>> The proof that this is a lie is that none of the "rebuttals" address
>> my airtight proof that I am correct, they simply dodged what I said
>> completely and continue to assert that a decider must compute the
>> mapping from a non-input even though they already know that a decider
>> is not allowed to compute a mapping from a non-input thus again
>> another lie.
>
> All your nonsense about "non-inputs" simply belies your continual
> misunderstanding of what Turing Machines are and how they actually work.
> In particular, you seem to have no grasp of the distinction between
> Turing Machines and the functions they compute and how those two things
> are related.
>
> Ben tried very patiently to step you through some examples of very
> simple Turing Machines in an effort to get you to construct some but you
> declined to follow through with this.
>
> Here's a question for you: If someone claimed to have spent 18 years
> studying K&R C but gave up in frustration when tasked with writing a
> simple C program to identify even numbers, would you accept their claim
> to be an expert on the C language?
>
> Yet you have asserted on numerous occasions to have a better
> understanding of both Turing Machines and the halting problem than
> anyone else here despite being unable to construct even a trivially
> simple TM and despite making all sorts of unsupported claims about TMs
> needing a gazillion steps to perform relatively straightforward tasks.
>
> Reading /about/ Turing Machines isn't how you actually gain a complete
> understanding of what they are and how they work. That's would you would
> call 'learning by rote'. If you want to really understand them you need
> to actually get your hands dirty and work with some real, fully
> implemented TMs.
>
> André
>

On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>
> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
> switched.
>
> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
> correctly simulated input.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30747&group=comp.theory#30747

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike,
Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:10:51 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="329c64b5163ea3f7b4477630ee123f72";
logging-data="31200"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QuoCupeWO8Su3Av4+L35HU6y+2H5k0YI="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qgtG1P1P3VrihwMGPhD/CmV4vfQ=
sha1:EDq19lQYmssqCLNJiNBG4xplyDI=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.ffec164208f0506182a6.20220422001051BST.87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:10 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Read my addendum.
>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>
> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>
> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>
>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>> switched.
>>
>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>> correctly simulated input.

Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
you don't name anyone as having helped you.

Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
get to an editor's day.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30748&group=comp.theory#30748

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:19:42 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:19:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 52
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Bw7N9lVHuqflMosjwwQuf44+tNILBhIAHR/yXjdr1Y3htIPMy6G+g6qp/iK8bffpMAnmwN0FdUXKQ3C!sg6M2CvwMHMP6EFjY/E7RCfoxeqvOK1Ww8ijSsGhfKxDHOP81IP76rfHtk3hrUsTn90a4gUMd1SK
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4128
 by: olcott - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:19 UTC

On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Read my addendum.
>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>
>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>
>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>
>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>> switched.
>>>
>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>> correctly simulated input.
>
> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>
> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
> get to an editor's day.
>

I am writing it up so that software engineers can validate it without
any knowledge of the halting problem. I translate the key computer
science terminology into software engineering terms.

To fully understand this paper a software engineer must be an expert in
the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C
translates into x86 and what an x86 process emulator is. No knowledge of
the halting problem is required.

The computer science term “halting” means that a Turing Machine
terminated normally reaching its last instruction known as its “final
state”. This is the same idea as when a function returns to its caller
as opposed to and contrast with getting stuck in an infinite loop or
infinite recursion.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30749&group=comp.theory#30749

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:32:55 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 18:32:54 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 43
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-6ZMEHrqJcu+d3EwcAvc8acIAHAzE1g4gDN1J8fvP2mslrqc6V384KbxO1DzTxzqXBgT+s779fBHdRai!kaidIyYrZQt8araSnQxadAMRBHfun+Ly4g2iiGlTtmr1zUTTcqykW6oR7QUq7DhS5GopiabzNNkm
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3716
 by: olcott - Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:32 UTC

On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Read my addendum.
>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>
>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>
>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>
>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>> switched.
>>>
>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>> correctly simulated input.
>
> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>
> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
> get to an editor's day.
>

People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is proven
to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H to report this.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30750&group=comp.theory#30750

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5bd0:0:b0:2f2:519:9187 with SMTP id b16-20020ac85bd0000000b002f205199187mr1482882qtb.186.1650586370785;
Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:100a:b0:642:456b:2f6a with SMTP id
w10-20020a056902100a00b00642456b2f6amr2169135ybt.527.1650586370581; Thu, 21
Apr 2022 17:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 17:12:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.143.231.9; posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.143.231.9
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,_Denni
s,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:12:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 68
 by: Malcolm McLean - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:12 UTC

On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 00:19:50 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
> > olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
> >>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Read my addendum.
> >>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
> >>
> >> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
> >>
> >> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
> >>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible..
> >>>
> >>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
> >>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
> >>> switched.
> >>>
> >>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
> >>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
> >>> correctly simulated input.
> >
> > Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
> > you don't name anyone as having helped you.
> >
> > Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
> > get to an editor's day.
> >
> I am writing it up so that software engineers can validate it without
> any knowledge of the halting problem. I translate the key computer
> science terminology into software engineering terms.
> To fully understand this paper a software engineer must be an expert in
> the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C
> translates into x86 and what an x86 process emulator is. No knowledge of
> the halting problem is required.
> The computer science term “halting” means that a Turing Machine
> terminated normally reaching its last instruction known as its “final
> state”. This is the same idea as when a function returns to its caller
> as opposed to and contrast with getting stuck in an infinite loop or
> infinite recursion.
>
The halting problem applies to x86 programs as well as to Turing machines,
so it's not inherently an error to work with x86 code. However it can cause
confusion, and in fact it is causing confusion. For instance, if you make
H a simulating halt decider, there is no infinite recursion and no simple
infinite loop in Linz's H_Hat<H_Hat> system . What you get instead is nested
emulation, which may or may not be infinite. Since a Turing machine has no
subroutines, if you stick to Turing machines, you are not in danger of making
this mistake.

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<veadneXkO7zxa_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30751&group=comp.theory#30751

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 19:27:24 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 19:27:23 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <veadneXkO7zxa_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 63
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-IM5tMzW01H/FTL/oPoi9orTvuPUDZAY9OQhFcoulD9gl3MldnCPFOh9eXrC1M0fgwbpfGdjtT/OKxto!4r2iraYg9rNGb3b8gKapPnlyBBdDURhNjWZejnSwFBJ34YXipfRvURlAHF4zpiizG5VDFdL1mmkw
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5073
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:27 UTC

On 4/21/2022 7:12 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 00:19:50 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Read my addendum.
>>>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>>>
>>>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>>>> switched.
>>>>>
>>>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>>>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>>>> correctly simulated input.
>>>
>>> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
>>> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>>>
>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>
>> I am writing it up so that software engineers can validate it without
>> any knowledge of the halting problem. I translate the key computer
>> science terminology into software engineering terms.
>> To fully understand this paper a software engineer must be an expert in
>> the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C
>> translates into x86 and what an x86 process emulator is. No knowledge of
>> the halting problem is required.
>> The computer science term “halting” means that a Turing Machine
>> terminated normally reaching its last instruction known as its “final
>> state”. This is the same idea as when a function returns to its caller
>> as opposed to and contrast with getting stuck in an infinite loop or
>> infinite recursion.
>>
> The halting problem applies to x86 programs as well as to Turing machines,
> so it's not inherently an error to work with x86 code. However it can cause
> confusion, and in fact it is causing confusion. For instance, if you make
> H a simulating halt decider, there is no infinite recursion and no simple
> infinite loop in Linz's H_Hat<H_Hat> system . What you get instead is nested
> emulation, which may or may not be infinite. Since a Turing machine has no
> subroutines, if you stick to Turing machines, you are not in danger of making
> this mistake.
>

Because a TM can be a UTM that simulates multiple levels of itself the
same thing applies to Linz.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<8b-dnRgcvLgGYfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30752&group=comp.theory#30752

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 19:53:46 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 19:53:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <8b-dnRgcvLgGYfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 74
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-1xAqVKoiEL15KstshsE9g5p0khLgHwZ31MKCMTYM8i8Or6hns2567GhAr5Do+rcIfTwxhSbQ1MbwVDp!oWPUffPjPDyq/YjgWDbG9pzKsrgh9DOHofKSrGWHZdT9PJdhSphhY6sPfp97bzYHCDtKckAwFF5N
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5610
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:53 UTC

On 4/21/2022 7:12 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 00:19:50 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Read my addendum.
>>>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>>>
>>>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>>>> switched.
>>>>>
>>>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>>>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>>>> correctly simulated input.
>>>
>>> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
>>> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>>>
>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>
>> I am writing it up so that software engineers can validate it without
>> any knowledge of the halting problem. I translate the key computer
>> science terminology into software engineering terms.
>> To fully understand this paper a software engineer must be an expert in
>> the C programming language, the x86 programming language, exactly how C
>> translates into x86 and what an x86 process emulator is. No knowledge of
>> the halting problem is required.
>> The computer science term “halting” means that a Turing Machine
>> terminated normally reaching its last instruction known as its “final
>> state”. This is the same idea as when a function returns to its caller
>> as opposed to and contrast with getting stuck in an infinite loop or
>> infinite recursion.
>>
> The halting problem applies to x86 programs as well as to Turing machines,
> so it's not inherently an error to work with x86 code. However it can cause
> confusion, and in fact it is causing confusion. For instance, if you make
> H a simulating halt decider, there is no infinite recursion and no simple
> infinite loop in Linz's H_Hat<H_Hat> system . What you get instead is nested
> emulation, which may or may not be infinite. Since a Turing machine has no
> subroutines, if you stick to Turing machines, you are not in danger of making
> this mistake.
>

HERE IS THE ACTUAL PROBLEM:
People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is proven
to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H to report this.

AND

No one here knows the x86 language well enough to be able to verify the
fact that the input to H(P,P) really does specify a non-halting sequence
of configurations and in their ignorance they simply assume that I am
wrong about this.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<87k0bh53c6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30754&group=comp.theory#30754

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike,
Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:11:53 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <87k0bh53c6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
<8b-dnRgcvLgGYfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="329c64b5163ea3f7b4477630ee123f72";
logging-data="1294"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+2+tSU9R+bFSPkf7HDlEd5KSzRsVA6vAI="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rze+mQlVryrpyM1B47WuMdujUu4=
sha1:tbQUh4PUTtyes543JALnxLl/gEY=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.6aa305d36b239317f413.20220422021153BST.87k0bh53c6.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 01:11 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> HERE IS THE ACTUAL PROBLEM:
> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
> to report this.

H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. No "alternative facts" can
make false the correct reply for a halting computation.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<c6Odncx31JiRn___nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30755&group=comp.theory#30755

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:17:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:16:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<14d4da81-985a-46cb-875e-9be90ba9e5e8n@googlegroups.com>
<8b-dnRgcvLgGYfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0bh53c6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87k0bh53c6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <c6Odncx31JiRn___nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 25
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-YNIrBfDhD4Ufq3uYr+8k/DhvWwc7sQJTVUKFb/CyMNrwD5yQAerMNT8BtsEvpm1N4bq8BNiWAOpU9ID!kSTqwumu/dk4d9kJWT1p7taLKkCAo7I+JCICpMAfTpT+csDfKPeZ+FGkH558sFgHaJVt6/2HFudB
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3069
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 01:16 UTC

On 4/21/2022 8:11 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> HERE IS THE ACTUAL PROBLEM:
>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>> to report this.
>
> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. No "alternative facts" can
> make false the correct reply for a halting computation.
>

If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
actual behavior supersedes and overrules any proxies for this actual
behavior.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<87ee1p52ze.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30756&group=comp.theory#30756

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike,
Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:19:33 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <87ee1p52ze.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<LYOdnajpqbQSe_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="329c64b5163ea3f7b4477630ee123f72";
logging-data="1294"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19K085cU9l0lidciwKrKWHEnzFtThXnaWM="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:akBKT3/k9jYkhZrxdQodt2GszNc=
sha1:N11kpZxxllZuIA7jD/mMpfoJ/84=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.9caf2c395129e0517aaf.20220422021933BST.87ee1p52ze.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 01:19 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Read my addendum.
>>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>>
>>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>>> switched.
>>>>
>>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its
>>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>>> correctly simulated input.
>> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected. At least
>> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>>
>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>> get to an editor's day.
>
> I am writing it up so that software engineers can validate it without
> any knowledge of the halting problem. I translate the key computer
> science terminology into software engineering terms.

Still chatting, I see.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30757&group=comp.theory#30757

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike,
Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:23:15 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="329c64b5163ea3f7b4477630ee123f72";
logging-data="1294"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX188jOR9DAh5Vpxxz8RcAjCihJWCW1buS00="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EnD+jJL0CDKnMpVRneVWCfh2JoU=
sha1:31UaBDEGNnfmEvl5XNOKDBxl5JE=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.2db81a94382637ab60c5.20220422022315BST.878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 01:23 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:

>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>> get to an editor's day.
>>
> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
> to report this.

H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. The problem of exhibiting
an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
not gone away. It's called the halting problem. There are famous
theorems about it. At one time you were interested in addressing it.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30758&group=comp.theory#30758

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:33:09 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 20:33:08 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 41
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-uF5poK6f/z4UxBC1LElmhcB/CuMqJl98ES129lr17zdo8surPkSRTSQFZK/dnv7yh1D2GNq4pZZZDFf!cnxErp1KyJRsBLHwC4ibzqDa1gz7NgWdNhH9p886HE0CCl6yJIp5FHrM/d6vxGTzFsvAPx8GYoRP
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3707
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 01:33 UTC

On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>
>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>
>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>> to report this.
>
> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. The problem of exhibiting
> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
> not gone away. It's called the halting problem. There are famous
> theorems about it. At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>

If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
that disagrees.

You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
sequence of configurations.

With H(P,P) H is called before P(P) is simulated.
With P(P) P is called before H(P,P) is invoked.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<kuednZaYx8o7kv__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30760&group=comp.theory#30760

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 21:15:02 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 21:15:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <kuednZaYx8o7kv__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 20
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8Ag+nIqjl286wFy0R8cyc5MrL5zDWl9q0C7bnmeL3jD2byCy/hcFJZb7TMVaK7i8P+eGLX/0Zll6EaV!zVB8asL0pVUnyEg4pTWI0+IK3jJLqsGX9uuYyq4F9GxEg4lTbKrdkWhI1+zZIPZ0sC9B2+KlLtiv
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2854
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:15 UTC

On 4/21/2022 8:33 PM, olcott wrote:
> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
> sequence of configurations.
>

This is clearer:
With H(P,P) H is invoked before P(P) is simulated.
With P(P) P is invoked before H(P,P) is invoked.

Because H and P are invoked in a different order this changes their
behavior.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My Dishonest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ continue to lie ]

<gho8K.606650$7F2.28675@fx12.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30761&group=comp.theory#30761

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx12.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_Dishonest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike
,_Dennis,_Richard_[_continue_to_lie_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<is2dnfjjo6EpcMD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rs1dt6y.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <gho8K.606650$7F2.28675@fx12.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:19:56 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4214
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:19 UTC

On 4/21/22 7:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 4:33 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Read my addendum.
>>>> You haven't cited anyone without their permission have you?
>>>
>>> THIS IS THE ADDENDUM
>>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 2:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> If we merely eliminate all of the reviews of my work on comp.theory my
>>>> current paper or anything remotely as good would have been infeasible.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the reviewers did initially have a much better understanding of
>>>> the halting problem than I had. In the last month or two places have
>>>> switched.
>>>>
>>>> A halt decider computes the mapping from its input finite strings to
>>>> its
>>>> own accept or reject state on the basis of the actual behavior of its
>>>> correctly simulated input.
>>
>> Unfortunate that you boast like that, but it's to be expected.  At least
>> you don't name anyone as having helped you.
>>
>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>> get to an editor's day.
>>
>
> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is proven
> to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H to report this.
>

So, you ADMIT that you aren't working on the ACTUAL "Conventional"
Halting Problem but have changed something to be a bit different but
still "close enough" for your arguement.

Problem is close doens't apply in logic. Either you have proved EXACTLY
what was requried or you haven't.

Thus it seems you have just admitting that all your work is just about
your POOP, and NOT the actual Halting Problem.

You seem to be admitting that you are changing the definiton of
"Halting" to be in a way that is actually computable, thus "Halting"
becomes computable.

Unfortunatele, PO-Halting appears to be inconssistent, and some machines
ae both correctly decided to be PO-Halting and PO-Non-Halting depending
on the Decider looking at them, and thus PO-Halting isn't actually a
property of the Computation.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<olo8K.622069$LN2.418835@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30762&group=comp.theory#30762

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!178.20.174.213.MISMATCH!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx13.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <olo8K.622069$LN2.418835@fx13.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:24:19 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4145
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:24 UTC

On 4/21/22 9:33 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>
>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>
>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>> to report this.
>>
>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.  The problem of exhibiting
>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>> not gone away.  It's called the halting problem.  There are famous
>> theorems about it.  At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>
>
> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
> actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
> that disagrees.
>
> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
> sequence of configurations.

Only with an incorrect definiton of "Correct"

Since you agreed that H applied to <H^> <H^> was to answer based on UTM
applied to <H^> <H^> and UTM applied to <H^> <H^> is DEFINED to be
behave giving the same results as H^ applied to <H^>, your definiton of
correct is shown to be in error.

>
> With H(P,P) H is called before P(P) is simulated.
> With P(P) P is called before H(P,P) is invoked.
>

If H(P,P) is not asking about the behavior of P(P), then you aren't
talking the Halting Problem.

If the behavior of P(P) depends on stuff "outside" of P(P) (like if it
is being simulated by H) then you aren't talking about Computations or
Computation Theory.

Thus, you are just admitting that EVERYTHING you have been talking about
is just your POOP, and Not actually about Halting.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<Wno8K.622070$LN2.72012@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30763&group=comp.theory#30763

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx13.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<kuednZaYx8o7kv__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <kuednZaYx8o7kv__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <Wno8K.622070$LN2.72012@fx13.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:27:02 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2777
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 02:27 UTC

On 4/21/22 10:15 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 8:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
>> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
>> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
>> sequence of configurations.
>>
>
> This is clearer:
> With H(P,P) H is invoked before P(P) is simulated.
> With P(P) P is invoked before H(P,P) is invoked.
>
> Because H and P are invoked in a different order this changes their
> behavior.
>

Only if they are not computations.

Computation depend ONLY on their input, and not anything else, and thus
"order" doesn't matter.

H thus must depend on some "hidden" input. thus isn't actually a
computation.

FAIL.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ] (rewritten twice)

<77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30764&group=comp.theory#30764

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:57:40 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:57:40 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]_(rewritten_twi
ce)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 42
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-5OIVobIhBJq0jGkRSTPsOYSp+VNp7QJuRLgx0ibh0uynOehcuP/hw8OHPt0rKK9NFlT0Zj2PWc9reWF!ycCbAb+3fT6CrFgyLQrLBUEmO5e/YXDynwgA7SxWMgNR3atlFTbEnp3vYI7yNkL/mwgdPX+AOTjs
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3824
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 03:57 UTC

On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>
>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>
>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>> to report this.
>
> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. The problem of exhibiting
> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
> not gone away. It's called the halting problem. There are famous
> theorems about it. At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>

If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
that disagrees.

You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
sequence of configurations.

With H(P,P) H is invoked before P(P) is simulated.
With P(P) P is invoked before H(P,P) is invoked.

Because H and P are invoked in a different order this changes their
behavior.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ] (rewritten twice)

<t3t9ub$8op$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30765&group=comp.theory#30765

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: agis...@gm.invalid (André G. Isaak)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]_(rewritten_twi
ce)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 22:11:54 -0600
Organization: Christians and Atheists United Against Creeping Agnosticism
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <t3t9ub$8op$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 04:11:55 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="c1c07c37bf1d92d7903dc426c3f417cf";
logging-data="8985"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/2GwL+W49j+4P9K8l3zGa2"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bkxKtWisiH6rS92i+4/J9oqoo3E=
In-Reply-To: <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: André G. Isaak - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 04:11 UTC

On 2022-04-21 21:57, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>
>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>
>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>> to report this.
>>
>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.  The problem of exhibiting
>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>> not gone away.  It's called the halting problem.  There are famous
>> theorems about it.  At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>
>
> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this

What does 'its' refer to? [you really need to stop using this word].

> actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
> that disagrees.

> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
> sequence of configurations.

Perhaps you can provide a definition of 'simulation' and/or of
'simulated input'. The way in which you use these terms seems at odds
with everyone else's usage.

> With H(P,P) H is invoked before P(P) is simulated.
> With P(P) P is invoked before H(P,P) is invoked.
>
> Because H and P are invoked in a different order this changes their
> behavior.

Computations don't have execution environments or contexts, and there
behaviour therefore cannot depend on such things. If the order of
invocation affects the behaviour, then you aren't dealing with actual
computations.

André

--
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
service.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ] (rewritten twice)

<zNudnTivI49xsf__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30766&group=comp.theory#30766

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:19:56 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 23:19:55 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]_(rewritten_twi
ce)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t3t9ub$8op$1@dont-email.me>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t3t9ub$8op$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <zNudnTivI49xsf__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 39
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-3ALPuEGj/MEstgSnQfmeT4PXGXVuRCqsgZLEkISHX/iuDwOv+bsl5pHux7YB4tjUkIuftS76Cvb636z!Q87H5dtvBi2vg7nUrKceBPW8YHzGqtfPSmzxS6aEG4oTPH8RBc4TxTvr7YAUDrR8TVk09FehKG0i
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3820
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 04:19 UTC

On 4/21/2022 11:11 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
> On 2022-04-21 21:57, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before
>>>>> you
>>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>>
>>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>>> to report this.
>>>
>>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.  The problem of exhibiting
>>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>>> not gone away.  It's called the halting problem.  There are famous
>>> theorems about it.  At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>>
>>
>> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
>> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
>
> What does 'its' refer to? [you really need to stop using this word].
If the actual behavior of the correctly simulated input to H(P,P)
specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations

then this actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any
everything else that disagrees.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<c94ad87a-8f6f-4d8a-a960-d1c4f718a8cen@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30767&group=comp.theory#30767

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1012:b0:2e1:e7f3:5c89 with SMTP id d18-20020a05622a101200b002e1e7f35c89mr2178382qte.550.1650611158103;
Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:05:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:4ed7:0:b0:2f5:d7d7:5afc with SMTP id
c206-20020a814ed7000000b002f5d7d75afcmr1367453ywb.65.1650611157893; Fri, 22
Apr 2022 00:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 00:05:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23a8:400a:5601:5968:a94b:e247:df83;
posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23a8:400a:5601:5968:a94b:e247:df83
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c94ad87a-8f6f-4d8a-a960-d1c4f718a8cen@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,_Dennis,_
Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:05:58 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 55
 by: Malcolm McLean - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 07:05 UTC

On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 02:33:17 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
> > olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
> >
> >>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
> >>> get to an editor's day.
> >>>
> >> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
> >> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
> >> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
> >> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
> >> to report this.
> >
> > H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. The problem of exhibiting
> > an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
> > not gone away. It's called the halting problem. There are famous
> > theorems about it. At one time you were interested in addressing it.
> >
> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
> actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
> that disagrees.
>
> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
> sequence of configurations.
>
> With H(P,P) H is called before P(P) is simulated.
> With P(P) P is called before H(P,P) is invoked.
>
In x86 assembly, it is indeed not too difficult to arrange that P(P) has
one behaviour when called directly, and another when simulated.
However that doesn't seem to be your problem. If it was, then P(P)
and H(P,P) would be consistent, and it would look, superficially, as though
you had found a counter-example to Linz's proof. In reality, of course,
some global flag would be buried away in the x86 code, maybe very
cleverly disguised.

P(P) halts, H(P,P) reports "non-halting". So everyone says "what is there to
see, clearly H get P(P) wrong, which is exactly what Linz said must happen?".
The answer is the execution trace. When you look at that, it does indeed
look as though the program might go on forever, and H is right to describe it
as "non-halting".
However the execution trace misses the call to H. Now plenty of people,
without ever seeing the source for H, have diagnosed what the problem
must be. Somewhere in the call to H, there is a test which breaks the
series of nested simulations.

They're almost certainly right. It is necessary to examine H to be absolutely
sure. You say that's too much code to reasonably expect anyone to analyse,
and you might well be right on that. So where you go is up to you. I urge to
to learn how to write Turing machines. If you are interested in Turing machines,
it's an essential skill.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ] (rewritten twice)

<uUw8K.3444$Awz.2427@fx03.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30770&group=comp.theory#30770

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx03.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]_(rewritten_twice)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com> <k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com> <875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <t3t9ub$8op$1@dont-email.me> <zNudnTivI49xsf__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <zNudnTivI49xsf__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <uUw8K.3444$Awz.2427@fx03.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:07:54 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4436
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 12:07 UTC

On 4/22/22 12:19 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 11:11 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>> On 2022-04-21 21:57, olcott wrote:
>>> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done
>>>>>> before you
>>>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>>>
>>>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>>>> to report this.
>>>>
>>>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.  The problem of exhibiting
>>>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>>>> not gone away.  It's called the halting problem.  There are famous
>>>> theorems about it.  At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
>>> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
>>
>> What does 'its' refer to? [you really need to stop using this word].
> If the actual behavior of the correctly simulated input to H(P,P)
> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations
>
> then this actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any
> everything else that disagrees.
>

*IF* again.

Since the ACTUAL BEHAVIOR of the input to H(P,P) is well defined given
your statement that H(P,P) is returning false, and that behavior is
Halting, we clearly do NOT have your "If" condition.

The problem is that you seem to be thinking of something different then
the actual behavior of that input. Indeed, you seem to not be looking at
the behavior of the input, but the behavior of H on that input, which
isn't what the actual question is asking.

The ACTUAL BEHAVIOR supersedes and overrules anything that H might say
that disagrees with the actual Truth.

Now, perhaps the problem is that you have (incorrectly) assumed a
definition of Truth that doesn't match that actual universal defintion
because you actully deny that that universe is a source of Truth, and
Truth is all in your own decisions.

Someday, maybe soon, you are going to find that there IS an unltimate
source of Truth that isn't yourself, and you are going to be told that
you need to pay up for that error.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ] (rewritten twice)

<YVw8K.3445$Awz.2138@fx03.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30771&group=comp.theory#30771

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx03.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]_(rewritten_twi
ce)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6bKdnUiZaaX12f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <77ydnayZOcEouv__nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <YVw8K.3445$Awz.2138@fx03.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 08:09:28 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 3802
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 12:09 UTC

On 4/21/22 11:57 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>
>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>
>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>> to report this.
>>
>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.  The problem of exhibiting
>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>> not gone away.  It's called the halting problem.  There are famous
>> theorems about it.  At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>
>
> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
> actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
> that disagrees.
>
> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
> sequence of configurations.
>
> With H(P,P) H is invoked before P(P) is simulated.
> With P(P) P is invoked before H(P,P) is invoked.
>
> Because H and P are invoked in a different order this changes their
> behavior.
>

Nope, violatiotion of the definition of a Computation.

Just proves that your H is NOT actually a Computation of just its
defined inputs but brings in something additional, and thus fails to
meet the requriements of a Halt Decider.

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<zsSdnS578JOiXP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30773&group=comp.theory#30773

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 09:52:47 -0500
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 09:52:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re:_My_honest_reviewers:_André,_Ben,_Mike,
_Dennis,_Richard_[_last_step_of_my_proof_]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9c20d915-4206-49d5-87c2-288881fc6c72n@googlegroups.com>
<k_CdnYInWIAI0f3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b43fb22c-3d19-4add-8a00-a34f0d6588b6n@googlegroups.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk> <JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c94ad87a-8f6f-4d8a-a960-d1c4f718a8cen@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <c94ad87a-8f6f-4d8a-a960-d1c4f718a8cen@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <zsSdnS578JOiXP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 115
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8Th9vSiMj6xavxATYP2ZVB+d/TmJPyoJl1v3RlkNU5QSz3/JTfo/YC1wNlScG3SUfUy+ELeoQevvBqF!7+NQ4wMjsTmS3k88cahsUZtlAZk3aYnrDKyb2B+v5XtTrdf5sUA6Bc2DKkY9kzTIn+nSRq3IpIvw
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 7409
 by: olcott - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:52 UTC

On 4/22/2022 2:05 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Friday, 22 April 2022 at 02:33:17 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/21/2022 8:23 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 4/21/2022 6:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Still, I expect there's a few years more chatting to be done before you
>>>>> get to an editor's day.
>>>>>
>>>> People here have gotten the conventional halting problem dogma so
>>>> ingrained in their psyche that they believe that even when it is
>>>> proven to be a verified fact that the input to H(P,P) specifies a
>>>> non-halting sequence of configurations it is somehow incorrect for H
>>>> to report this.
>>>
>>> H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts. The problem of exhibiting
>>> an H such that H(X,Y) == false if, and only if, X(Y) does not halt has
>>> not gone away. It's called the halting problem. There are famous
>>> theorems about it. At one time you were interested in addressing it.
>>>
>> If the correctly simulated input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting
>> sequence of configurations on the basis of its actual behavior then this
>> actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything any everything else
>> that disagrees.
>>
>> You keep maintaining the false assumption that the simulated input to
>> H(P,P) must be computationally equivalent to the direct execution of
>> P(P). It is easy to see that they specify a semantically different
>> sequence of configurations.
>>
>> With H(P,P) H is called before P(P) is simulated.
>> With P(P) P is called before H(P,P) is invoked.
>>
> In x86 assembly, it is indeed not too difficult to arrange that P(P) has
> one behaviour when called directly, and another when simulated.
> However that doesn't seem to be your problem. If it was, then P(P)
> and H(P,P) would be consistent, and it would look, superficially, as though
> you had found a counter-example to Linz's proof. In reality, of course,
> some global flag would be buried away in the x86 code, maybe very
> cleverly disguised.
>
> P(P) halts, H(P,P) reports "non-halting". So everyone says "what is there to
> see, clearly H get P(P) wrong, which is exactly what Linz said must happen?".
> The answer is the execution trace. When you look at that, it does indeed
> look as though the program might go on forever, and H is right to describe it
> as "non-halting".
> However the execution trace misses the call to H.

It misses nothing, 264 pages of extraneous detail that says nothing more
than the fact that H does emulate its input one instruction at a time
with an x86 emulator until it recognizes the same infinitely repeating
pattern that we can all see.

People here that know the x86 language (only me) can see that the
execution trace that H provides of P is correct on the basis of the x86
source code for P.

> Now plenty of people,
> without ever seeing the source for H, have diagnosed what the problem
> must be. Somewhere in the call to H, there is a test which breaks the
> series of nested simulations.
>

Aborting an input does not help this now dead input to continue to
execute until it reaches its own final state. Richard could never begin
to understand this so I finally totally gave up on him.

The point is not whether or not the simulated P stops running the point
is that it never halts even if it does stop running. It has to reach its
own final state to halt. Infinite recursion prevents this.

P(P) specifies the first invocation of what would otherwise be infinite
recursion and H(P,P) terminates this otherwise infinite recursion at its
second call.

H(P,P) the infinite recursion is not hidden from H in this case so it
terminates it at its first call.

> They're almost certainly right.

If the actual behavior of the correctly simulated input to H(P,P)
specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations

then this actual behavior supersedes and overrules anything and
everything else that disagrees.

It does not matter at all that P(P) halts when we have proven that the
input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations. The
actual behavior of the actual input is the ultimate measure of its
behavior.

> It is necessary to examine H to be absolutely
> sure. You say that's too much code to reasonably expect anyone to analyse,

(a) H continues to emulate its input with an x86 emulator until it sees
the same infinitely repeating pattern that we can all see.

(b) We can verify this fact by simply looking at the x86 source code for
P and the execution trace of P that H produces.

(c) 264 pages of additional execution trace would not help to see this,
it would only provide enormous clutter that must be sifted through.

> and you might well be right on that. So where you go is up to you. I urge to
> to learn how to write Turing machines. If you are interested in Turing machines,
> it's an essential skill.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike, Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]

<87y1zx2btc.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=30785&group=comp.theory#30785

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: My honest reviewers: André, Ben, Mike,
Dennis, Richard [ last step of my proof ]
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 19:49:19 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <87y1zx2btc.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875yn3bizy.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Z-udnV7hMt3B8_3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilr3a0nf.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VOidnWT1aM1QDv3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsm78f3g.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i9edne5z1uDAOf3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czha5mxl.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<RPudnZmn_5gcPfz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d7i5k2a.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<GNWdncXHybl3M_z_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qxq5glj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<i6ednYAwLs0DX_z_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87v8v23yvv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<7_adnYWTXbMhSfz_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmla3udg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<QKydnXjgE7s6dPz_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<878rrx52t8.fsf_-_@bsb.me.uk>
<JKednVQh381ImP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c94ad87a-8f6f-4d8a-a960-d1c4f718a8cen@googlegroups.com>
<zsSdnS578JOiXP__nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="329c64b5163ea3f7b4477630ee123f72";
logging-data="4634"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rAhq/wnvnP/bTL06bz7dcosZZ/mqTVII="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:f/goqOItETe0AsfgHSWxb1Nxvig=
sha1:H/F5lMlyq3K9Ten11cgTMmvKOMQ=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.3e14b08af8ba14321d62.20220422194919BST.87y1zx2btc.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 22 Apr 2022 18:49 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> It does not matter at all that P(P) halts when we have proven that the
> input to H(P,P) specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.

The halting problem -- a function D such that D(X,Y) returns true iff
X(Y) halts and false otherwise -- does not go away just because you
decide to address some other question, even if it sounds superficially a
bit similar.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor