My credentials:

* BSc (Hons) Computer Science
* 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.

/Flibble

On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> My credentials:
>
> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>
> /Flibble
>

We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
incompleteness and the halting problem.

--
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 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>> My credentials:
>>
>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>
>> /Flibble
>>
>
> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying incompleteness and the halting
> problem.
>

.... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours
wasted "studying" incompleteness and halting problem. Are you trying to suggest that your wasted
15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)? (That does seem consistent with all your other
self-delusions.)

Mike.

On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> My credentials:
>>>
>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>
>
> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr

The only thing missing from a degree in computer science is physics 101
lab and calculus II. I was adding computer science on top of my BSBA
degree. This took me 6.5 years including Summers. I had a 3.515 GPA at
gradution.

> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and
> halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted 15000 hours
> qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent with all
> your other self-delusions.)
>
>
> Mike.

--
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 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> My credentials:
>>>
>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>
>
> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and
> halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted 15000 hours
> qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent with all
> your other self-delusions.)
>
>
> Mike.

I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that Flibble
refers to, he got this from me.

--
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 07/05/2022 19:45, olcott wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> My credentials:
>>>>
>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>
>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying incompleteness and the halting
>>> problem.
>>>
>>
>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
>
> The only thing missing from a degree in computer science is physics 101 lab and calculus II. I was
> adding computer science on top of my BSBA degree. This took me 6.5 years including Summers. I had a
> 3.515 GPA at gradution.

So as I said, you don't have a degree in computer science. (No big deal, really, apart from when
you try to suggest otherwise...)

>
>> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you
>> trying to suggest that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem
>> consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
>>
>>
>> Mike.
>
>

On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> > On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> >> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>> My credentials:
> >>>
> >>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> >>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>
> >>
> >> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
> >> incompleteness and the halting problem.
> >>
> >
> > ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
> > Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness
> > and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted
> > 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem
> > consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
> >
> >
> > Mike.
>
> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently to
you when I read [Strachey, 1965].

/Flibble

On 5/7/2022 2:15 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 07/05/2022 19:45, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> My credentials:
>>>>>
>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>>>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
>>
>> The only thing missing from a degree in computer science is physics
>> 101 lab and calculus II. I was adding computer science on top of my
>> BSBA degree. This took me 6.5 years including Summers. I had a 3.515
>> GPA at gradution.
>
> So as I said, you don't have a degree in computer science.  (No big
> deal, really, apart from when you try to suggest otherwise...)
>

What I have is equivalent to a degree in computer science. The only two
things that are missing from my degree are non-computer science things.
I had 192 credit hours of the 125 that I needed to graduate, 54% more
than needed.

>>
>>> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and
>>> halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted 15000
>>> hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent
>>> with all your other self-delusions.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>
>>

--
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 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> My credentials:
>>>>>
>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>>>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
>>> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness
>>> and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted
>>> 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem
>>> consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>
>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
>
> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently to
> you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
>
> /Flibble
>

It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.

--
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 Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
> > olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> >>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>>>> My credentials:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> >>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
> >>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and
> >>> Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
> >>> incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest
> >>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
> >>> (That does seem consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mike.
> >>
> >> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
> >> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
> >
> > If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently
> > to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.

/Flibble

On 5/7/2022 2:38 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>> My credentials:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
>>>>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and
>>>>> Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
>>>>> incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest
>>>>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
>>>>> (That does seem consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike.
>>>>
>>>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
>>>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
>>>
>>> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently
>>> to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
>
> That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
> discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.
>
> /Flibble
>

That is fair enough, and good job for you. It took me from 2004 until
2016 to inadvertently notice this. Then it became the basis for my proof.

It isn't actually infinite recursion it is infinitely nested simulation
and this only applies to simulating halt deciders.

"it looks like the original specification provided in the Linz text may
be infinitely recursive in that each TM requires its own input."

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307509556_Self_Modifying_Turing_Machine_SMTM_Solution_to_the_Halting_Problem_concrete_example

--
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 Sat, 7 May 2022 15:02:07 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 5/7/2022 2:38 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
> > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
> >>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> >>>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>>>>>> My credentials:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> >>>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
> >>>>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and
> >>>>> Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
> >>>>> incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest
> >>>>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
> >>>>> (That does seem consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mike.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
> >>>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
> >>>
> >>> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently
> >>> to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>
> >>
> >> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
> >
> > That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
> > discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> That is fair enough, and good job for you. It took me from 2004 until
> 2016 to inadvertently notice this. Then it became the basis for my
> proof.
>
> It isn't actually infinite recursion it is infinitely nested
> simulation and this only applies to simulating halt deciders.

Disagree: the infinite recursion in [Starchey, 1965] doesn't mention
simulating halt deciders.

/Flibble

On 07/05/2022 20:07, olcott wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> My credentials:
>>>>
>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>
>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying incompleteness and the halting
>>> problem.
>>>
>>
>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000
>> hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your
>> wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent with all your other
>> self-delusions.)
>>
>>
>> Mike.
>
> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that Flibble refers to, he got this from me.

Well, perhaps that counts as having a BSC (Hons) Computer Science (NOT). :)

Are you trying to suggest that because Mr Flibble has a CS BSC, and you gave him an idea, that means
you are smarter than him so you must have a CS BSC too? (It doesn't mean that. It doesn't really
mean anything much at all - why even mention this? And I see that MF disputes your claim in any
case!)

Mike.

On 5/7/2022 3:05 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 15:02:07 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/7/2022 2:38 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
>>>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>>>> My credentials:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>>>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
>>>>>>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and
>>>>>>> Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
>>>>>>> incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest
>>>>>>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
>>>>>>> (That does seem consistent with all your other self-delusions.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mike.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
>>>>>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
>>>>>
>>>>> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion independently
>>>>> to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
>>>
>>> That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
>>> discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> That is fair enough, and good job for you. It took me from 2004 until
>> 2016 to inadvertently notice this. Then it became the basis for my
>> proof.
>>
>> It isn't actually infinite recursion it is infinitely nested
>> simulation and this only applies to simulating halt deciders.
>
> Disagree: the infinite recursion in [Starchey, 1965] doesn't mention
> simulating halt deciders.
>
> /Flibble
>

Doesn't mention infinite recursion either.
https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article/7/4/313/354243

--
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 Sat, 7 May 2022 15:26:44 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 5/7/2022 3:05 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 May 2022 15:02:07 -0500
> > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/7/2022 2:38 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
> >>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
> >>>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> My credentials:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> >>>>>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
> >>>>>>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science,
> >>>>>>> and Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
> >>>>>>> incompleteness and halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest
> >>>>>>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
> >>>>>>> (That does seem consistent with all your other
> >>>>>>> self-delusions.)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Mike.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
> >>>>>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion
> >>>>> independently to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
> >>>
> >>> That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
> >>> discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>
> >>
> >> That is fair enough, and good job for you. It took me from 2004
> >> until 2016 to inadvertently notice this. Then it became the basis
> >> for my proof.
> >>
> >> It isn't actually infinite recursion it is infinitely nested
> >> simulation and this only applies to simulating halt deciders.
> >
> > Disagree: the infinite recursion in [Starchey, 1965] doesn't mention
> > simulating halt deciders.
> >
> > /Flibble
> >
>
> Doesn't mention infinite recursion either.
> https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article/7/4/313/354243
So what? I recognized the infinite recursion present in the proof;
nothing to do with simulating halt deciders and only to do with what
was present in the proof itself.

/Flibble

On Sunday, 8 May 2022 at 04:31:45 UTC+8, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2022 15:26:44 -0500
> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
> > On 5/7/2022 3:05 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > > On Sat, 7 May 2022 15:02:07 -0500
> > > olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 5/7/2022 2:38 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > >>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:34:28 -0500
> > >>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 5/7/2022 2:17 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > >>>>> On Sat, 7 May 2022 14:07:40 -0500
> > >>>>> olcott <polc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> My credentials:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
> > >>>>>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> /Flibble
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours
> > >>>>>>>> studying incompleteness and the halting problem.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science,
> > >>>>>>> and Mr Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying"
> > >>>>>>> incompleteness and halting problem. Are you trying to suggest
> > >>>>>>> that your wasted 15000 hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?
> > >>>>>>> (That does seem consistent with all your other
> > >>>>>>> self-delusions.)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Mike.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I was the first one to think about the infinite recursion that
> > >>>>>> Flibble refers to, he got this from me.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If memory serves I recognized the infinite recursion
> > >>>>> independently to you when I read [Strachey, 1965].
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> /Flibble
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It is documented that I recognized this in 2016.
> > >>>
> > >>> That has no bearing on my discovering it independently: you simply
> > >>> discovered it before me and I wasn't familiar with your work.
> > >>>
> > >>> /Flibble
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> That is fair enough, and good job for you. It took me from 2004
> > >> until 2016 to inadvertently notice this. Then it became the basis
> > >> for my proof.
> > >>
> > >> It isn't actually infinite recursion it is infinitely nested
> > >> simulation and this only applies to simulating halt deciders.
> > >
> > > Disagree: the infinite recursion in [Starchey, 1965] doesn't mention
> > > simulating halt deciders.
> > >
> > > /Flibble
> > >
> >
> > Doesn't mention infinite recursion either.
> > https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article/7/4/313/354243
> So what? I recognized the infinite recursion present in the proof;
> nothing to do with simulating halt deciders and only to do with what
> was present in the proof itself.
>
> /Flibble

I have already published my General Undecidable Rule GUR(V4):
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/_tbCYyMox9M
....
+-------------+
| Acknowledge |
+-------------+
I would like to acknowledge Olcott tirelessly refuted various wrong
conventional HP proofs over these years for me. So I need not to do the
same work again, though not necessary.

In Example 2, a halting decider U can not return correctly. TM in such a state is
referred to as "undecidable" by conventional HP proof. The notion "undecidable" conveys is
crucial but I do not know who to attribute.
....
--------------
I'd like to thank Mr. Olcott again working so hard the last months publicating
the falsehood of various misunderstandings for me. All should now be more clear
than ever.

On 5/7/2022 12:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> My credentials:
>>>>
>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>
>>>> /Flibble
>>>>
>>>
>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>
>>
>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
>
> The only thing missing from a degree in computer science is physics 101
> lab and calculus II. I was adding computer science on top of my BSBA
> degree. This took me 6.5 years including Summers. I had a 3.515 GPA at
> gradution.
Can we assume that an A average is 5 where you matriculated? That you
had a C average and took 6.5 years to do some of a 4 year course sounds
about right to me - dual majors? usually don't take extra time. And all
you left out was baby physics and junior math? I'd be embarrassed to
admit that so I think you think you are trolling again.
Do you attend alumni events on a regular basis? And are you on the list
of the almost famous from there? If you tell us where you achieved your
education, we will all write letters nominating you for honors.
I've noticed that many high school and colleges have publications for
former students - where they are today, what they are doing, mixed with
pleas for funds. etc. If you make a donation, I'm sure they might print
one of your learned papers, thus achieving your life time dream for only
peanuts.Then you can cite
P. U. Olcott, (2022) Impossible results on impossible problems in
/J. Podunk U Alumni/ 2(6).
>> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and
>> halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted 15000
>> hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent with
>> all your other self-delusions.)
+1
--
Jeff Barnett

On 5/7/2022 11:33 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote:
> On 5/7/2022 12:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/7/2022 1:31 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>> On 07/05/2022 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/7/2022 11:43 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> My credentials:
>>>>>
>>>>> * BSc (Hons) Computer Science
>>>>> * 30 years software development experience, primarily C++.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We have the same qualifications when you add 15,000 hours studying
>>>> incompleteness and the halting problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ... except that you don't have a degree in Computer Science, and Mr
>>
>> The only thing missing from a degree in computer science is physics
>> 101 lab and calculus II. I was adding computer science on top of my
>> BSBA degree. This took me 6.5 years including Summers. I had a 3.515
>> GPA at gradution.
>
> Can we assume that an A average is 5 where you matriculated?

3.515 = A-

> That you
> had a C average and took 6.5 years to do some of a 4 year course sounds
> about right to me - dual majors? usually don't take extra time. And all
> you left out was baby physics and junior math? I'd be embarrassed to
> admit that so I think you think you are trolling again.
>
> Do you attend alumni events on a regular basis? And are you on the list
> of the almost famous from there? If you tell us where you achieved your
> education, we will all write letters nominating you for honors.
>
> I've noticed that many high school and colleges have publications for
> former students - where they are today, what they are doing, mixed with
> pleas for funds. etc. If you make a donation, I'm sure they might print
> one of your learned papers, thus achieving your life time dream for only
> peanuts.Then you can cite
>
>    P. U. Olcott, (2022) Impossible results on impossible problems in
> /J. Podunk U Alumni/ 2(6).
>
>>> Flibble doesn't have 15000 hours wasted "studying" incompleteness and
>>> halting problem.  Are you trying to suggest that your wasted 15000
>>> hours qualifies you for a BSC (Hons)?  (That does seem consistent
>>> with all your other self-delusions.)
> +1

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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