On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>
> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>

Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

On 3/26/22 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>>
>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>>
>
> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.
>

Nope, they aren't dishonest dodges, that is what YOU are doing to avoid
facing the Truth.

I think that in you heart, you KNOW that people are saying things that
have truth in them, but you are so locked into your fantasy, that you
can't allow youself to look at them.

You have basically DOOMED yourself to die with the legacy of the FOOL.

The end of your time to repent is coming close, unless you are just
lying about that too.

On 3/26/2022 5:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/26/22 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>>>
>>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>>>
>>
>> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.
>>
>
> Nope, they aren't dishonest dodges, that is what YOU are doing to avoid
> facing the Truth.
>

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

> I think that in you heart, you KNOW that people are saying things that
> have truth in them, but you are so locked into your fantasy, that you
> can't allow youself to look at them.
>
> You have basically DOOMED yourself to die with the legacy of the FOOL.
>
> The end of your time to repent is coming close, unless you are just
> lying about that too.

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

On 3/26/22 9:13 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/26/2022 5:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/26/22 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>>>>
>>>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, they aren't dishonest dodges, that is what YOU are doing to
>> avoid facing the Truth.
>>
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
>
>> I think that in you heart, you KNOW that people are saying things that
>> have truth in them, but you are so locked into your fantasy, that you
>> can't allow youself to look at them.
>>
>> You have basically DOOMED yourself to die with the legacy of the FOOL.
>>
>> The end of your time to repent is coming close, unless you are just
>> lying about that too.
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>
>

Nope. THE DEFINITION of the right answer is what the ACTUAL TURING
MACHINE the input represents does.

Anything else, that isn't PROVABLY EXACTLY THE SAME, is WRONG.

This is the plain meaning of the words.

Your use of something different just PROVES that you whole arguement is
a LIE.

Your repeating it 4 times, just shows your maturing it that of a Toddler.

FAIL.

On 3/26/2022 8:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>
> On 3/26/22 9:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/26/2022 5:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 3/26/22 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>>>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>>>>>
>>>>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, they aren't dishonest dodges, that is what YOU are doing to
>>> avoid facing the Truth.
>>>
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>>
>>> I think that in you heart, you KNOW that people are saying things
>>> that have truth in them, but you are so locked into your fantasy,
>>> that you can't allow youself to look at them.
>>>
>>> You have basically DOOMED yourself to die with the legacy of the FOOL.
>>>
>>> The end of your time to repent is coming close, unless you are just
>>> lying about that too.
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider is
>> whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own final
>> state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest dodge.
>>
>>
>
> Nope. THE DEFINITION of the right answer is what the ACTUAL TURING
> MACHINE the input represents does.
>

The actual behavior of the actual simulated input it what counts.

Anything besides the actual behavior of the actual simulated input DOES
NOT COUNT.

> Anything else, that isn't PROVABLY EXACTLY THE SAME, is WRONG.
>
> This is the plain meaning of the words.
>
> Your use of something different just PROVES that you whole arguement is
> a LIE.
>
> Your repeating it 4 times, just shows your maturing it that of a Toddler.
>
> FAIL.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

On 3/26/22 9:30 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/26/2022 8:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>> On 3/26/22 9:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/26/2022 5:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/26/22 12:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>>>>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope, they aren't dishonest dodges, that is what YOU are doing to
>>>> avoid facing the Truth.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think that in you heart, you KNOW that people are saying things
>>>> that have truth in them, but you are so locked into your fantasy,
>>>> that you can't allow youself to look at them.
>>>>
>>>> You have basically DOOMED yourself to die with the legacy of the FOOL.
>>>>
>>>> The end of your time to repent is coming close, unless you are just
>>>> lying about that too.
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>> The only correct halt status criteria for a simulating halt decider
>>> is whether or not the simulated input can possibly reach its own
>>> final state. Every distraction away from this point is a dishonest
>>> dodge.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Nope. THE DEFINITION of the right answer is what the ACTUAL TURING
>> MACHINE the input represents does.
>>
>
> The actual behavior of the actual simulated input it what counts.
>
> Anything besides the actual behavior of the actual simulated input DOES
> NOT COUNT.

NOPE. READ THE DEFINITION!

It is the behavior of the ACTUAL TURING MACHINE THE INPUT REPRESENT.

That you can't see that seems to imply that you are illiterate.

To QUOTE.

H applied to <M> w needs to go to Qy if and only if M applied to w Halts
and to Qn if M appllied to w will never halt.

M applied to w is the computation that the input <M> w represents.

There is NO mention of a 'simulation' in the definition.

That is a figment in your own mind.

FAIL. (or LIE)

If you don't start with the right definition, you won't get to the right
answer. You whole argument is thus UNSOUND. (as are you).

>
>> Anything else, that isn't PROVABLY EXACTLY THE SAME, is WRONG.
>>
>> This is the plain meaning of the words.
>>
>> Your use of something different just PROVES that you whole arguement
>> is a LIE.
>>
>> Your repeating it 4 times, just shows your maturing it that of a Toddler.
>>
>> FAIL.
>
>

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 3/25/2022 10:50 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 3/25/2022 3:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> Which Ĥ is this?
>>> A Simulating Halt Decider...
>> In a proper exchange of ideas, you'd answer the questions put to you.
>
> Not when these questions are dishonest dodges used to avoid the point.

Project much?

--
Ben.