Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

She sells cshs by the cshore.


devel / comp.theory / Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

SubjectAuthor
* Category errorMr Flibble
+* Category errorolcott
|`* Category errorRichard Damon
| `* Category errorolcott
|  `* Category errorRichard Damon
|   `* Category errorolcott
|    `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|     `* Category errorolcott
|      `* Category errorRichard Damon
|       +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|       |`* Category errorolcott
|       | `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|       |  +- Category errorRichard Damon
|       |  `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   +* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   |`* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | +* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   | |`* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | | `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]André G. Isaak
|       |   | |  `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   | `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |  `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |   `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |    `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |     `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   |      `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |   |       `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |   `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |    `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |     `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |      `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |       `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       |        `* Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]olcott
|       |         `- Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]Richard Damon
|       `* Category errorolcott
|        +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |`* Category errorolcott
|        | `* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |  `* Category errorolcott
|        |   +* Category errorAndré G. Isaak
|        |   |`- Category errorolcott
|        |   `* Category errorRichard Damon
|        |    `* Category errorolcott
|        |     `* Category errorRichard Damon
|        |      `* Category errorolcott
|        |       `- Category errorRichard Damon
|        `- Category errorRichard Damon
+* Category errorwij
|`* Category errorMr Flibble
| `- Category errorolcott
`* Category errorMikko
 `* Category errorolcott
  +* Category errorRichard Damon
  |`* Category errorolcott
  | `- Category errorRichard Damon
  `* Category errorBen
   +* Category errorolcott
   |+- Category errorRichard Damon
   |`- Category errorBen
   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
    +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
    `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
     `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Malcolm McLean
      | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      |  `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Malcolm McLean
      |   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
      |    `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
      `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
       `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
        +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
        `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben
         `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]olcott
          +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Richard Damon
          +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |+- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Richard Damon
          |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Ben
          | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)olcott
          |  +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Richard Damon
          |  `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)Ben
          |   `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          |    +- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Richard Damon
          |    `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Ben
          |     +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          |     |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)Ben
          |     | `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Ben
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  |||+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  |||| `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  ||||  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Richard Damon
          |     |  |||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Malcolm McLean
          |     |  ||| `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |||  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[Richard Damon
          |     |  ||`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Ben
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |+* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  |`* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[olcott
          |     |  `- Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)[ Ben is a Liar ]Richard Damon
          |     `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (smart honest people would agree)olcott
          +* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Python
          `* Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]Ben

Pages:123456789101112
Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<1kfhK.1148$cvmb.863@fx06.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32585&group=comp.theory#32585

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx06.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me>
<o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pu7e$c99$1@dont-email.me>
<R7ydnS43-Kt14B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Ew5gK.6021$i7Ab.749@fx05.iad>
<EbKdnVNfIrrQ-Bn_nZ2dnUU7_8xQAAAA@giganews.com> <4P4hK.9996$dLI5.27@fx48.iad>
<FpWdnTPKrfH5lhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <FpWdnTPKrfH5lhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 169
Message-ID: <1kfhK.1148$cvmb.863@fx06.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:30:04 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 8407
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:30 UTC

On 5/18/22 11:06 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/17/22 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/15/2022 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/15/22 12:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/14/2022 11:06 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 21:02, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge, Massachusetts
>>>>>>>>>>>> and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read Godel's
>>>>>>>>>>> paper at this point either, so he makes the same error you do
>>>>>>>>>>> of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a
>>>>>>>>>> private journal which was never intended for publication
>>>>>>>>>> (which explains why he never bothered to retract this remark
>>>>>>>>>> once the error became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have been
>>>>>>>>>> pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yet people make proofs over infinite sets all the time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as semantic
>>>>>>> connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their
>>>>>>> meaning through semantic connections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument. And
>>>>>> your use of the term 'analytic' doesn't seem to correspond to the
>>>>>> standard usage. The analytic/synthetic distinction is one that
>>>>>> normally arises when talking about the philosophy of language, not
>>>>>> logic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is not how proofs work. You're the one making a claim. The
>>>>>> burden of proof lies with you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And your specific claims are far too vaguely defined for anyone to
>>>>>> track down counterexamples. For example, I have absolutely no idea
>>>>>> what you mean by 'semantic connection'.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will make that one concrete.
>>>>> Try to provide a sentence that is true that is not connected to
>>>>> anything else that shows that it is true.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One of:
>>>>
>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is True.
>>>>
>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is False.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is connected to tautology.
>>>
>>
>> Nope. We know that one of the sentences is true.
>>
>> THAT sentence is not establisned by "Tautology"
>>
>> That sentence being true disproves your statement.
>>
>
> You did not provide an example of a sentence that is true that is not
> connected to anything else that shows that it is true.

One of these sentences is such an example, I don't know which one:

The Collbatz conjecture is True.

The Collbatz conjecture is False.

The fact that I don't know which one doesn't make the arguement invalid,
it points out that there is a limit to knowledge.

A second example.

Godel sentence G is True.

You may not accept that it is True, but it is. To quote from one of your
favorite sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems

The Gödel sentence is designed to refer, indirectly, to itself. The
sentence states that, when a particular sequence of steps is used to
construct another sentence, that constructed sentence will not be
provable in F. However, the sequence of steps is such that the
constructed sentence turns out to be GF itself. In this way, the Gödel
sentence GF indirectly states its own unprovability within F (Smith
2007, p. 135).

To prove the first incompleteness theorem, Gödel demonstrated that the
notion of provability within a system could be expressed purely in terms
of arithmetical functions that operate on Gödel numbers of sentences of
the system. Therefore, the system, which can prove certain facts about
numbers, can also indirectly prove facts about its own statements,
provided that it is effectively generated. Questions about the
provability of statements within the system are represented as questions
about the arithmetical properties of numbers themselves, which would be
decidable by the system if it were complete.

Thus, although the Gödel sentence refers indirectly to sentences of the
system F, when read as an arithmetical statement the Gödel sentence
directly refers only to natural numbers. It asserts that no natural
number has a particular property, where that property is given by a
primitive recursive relation (Smith 2007, p. 141). As such, the Gödel
sentence can be written in the language of arithmetic with a simple
syntactic form. In particular, it can be expressed as a formula in the
language of arithmetic consisting of a number of leading universal
quantifiers followed by a quantifier-free body (these formulas are at
level Π 1 0 {\displaystyle \Pi _{1}^{0}} \Pi _{1}^{0} of the
arithmetical hierarchy). Via the MRDP theorem, the Gödel sentence can be
re-written as a statement that a particular polynomial in many variables
with integer coefficients never takes the value zero when integers are
substituted for its variables (Franzén 2005, p. 71).

So the Godel sentence, being "Just" a mathematical sentence, if
definitionally a Truth Bearer, and either needs to be True, or it is False.

>
> We know that logic sentences are true or false on the basis of the
> definition of logic sentence.

Right, so G needs to be either True of False, and if it is False, then
we can prove it, making it True.

>
>
>> Unless you are defining that "untrue or untrue" is True, you have a
>> problem (and if yoy do, you still have a proble).
>
>

Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<0ufhK.33760$6dof.24551@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32588&group=comp.theory#32588

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me>
<o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9u5gK.6020$i7Ab.3784@fx05.iad>
<EbKdnVBfIrpJ-Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1k5hK.8430$Yfl6.562@fx41.iad>
<65WdnVtH4_ccjBj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <65WdnVtH4_ccjBj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 177
Message-ID: <0ufhK.33760$6dof.24551@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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:40:36 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 7667
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:40 UTC

On 5/18/22 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 7:07 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/17/22 11:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/15/2022 6:29 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/14/22 11:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge, Massachusetts
>>>>>>>>>> and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read Godel's
>>>>>>>>> paper at this point either, so he makes the same error you do
>>>>>>>>> of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a private
>>>>>>>> journal which was never intended for publication (which explains
>>>>>>>> why he never bothered to retract this remark once the error
>>>>>>>> became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have been
>>>>>>>> pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>
>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as semantic
>>>>> connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>
>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their meaning
>>>>> through semantic connections.
>>>>>
>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>
>>>> Which PROVES that you don't know the meaning of the word PROOF.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Proof generically means that an expression of language has been
>>> definitely established as true by some means.
>>>
>>>> By that standard, Collatz, and the Twin Primes, amoung many others,
>>>> are PROVED.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> STANDARD_MEANING:
>>>>> (c) Analytic expressions of language are only true on the basis of
>>>>> their meaning.
>>>>
>>>> Source? That actually mean True, as opossed to just "Known True".
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is the definition of analytic truth.
>>>
>>> “Analytic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are doctors,” have
>>> historically been characterized as ones that are true by virtue of
>>> the meanings of their words alone and/or can be known to be so solely
>>> by knowing those meanings.
>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
>>
>> Note "Historically", that was what was assumed to be a characteristic
>> of such statements, that they could be shown true or false by a manner
>> of proof.
>>
>> Then, we got the proof that some statements, that might want to be
>> called analytic couldn't be proven or disproven.
>>
>
> There is no freaking "might want" there is only <is> and <not is>.
> If you "might want the definitions of a term to be different than it is
> then you are simply screwy.

A century ago, Math was thought to be Analytical, and all Analytical
statements eventually provable or refutable. It was then discovered that
this can not be true.

You need to decide, either you remove Mathematics from Analytical or you
remove Provable from Analytically True.

>
>> As pointed out, in part, the question is "Is Mathematics Analytic", or
>> is it more emperical.
>>
>
> It is stipulated that math and logic are purely analytical.

Then there exists analytical statements that are True but not Provable.

That is PROVEN.

>
>> Can "The Square of the Hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares
>> of the other two sides", be actually thought of as a ANALYTIC proof,
>> doesn't it truth come out of the MEANING of the words, or is it an
>> emperical truth show to be true because it just works.
>>
>
> Empirical means that you must be able to taste, touch, smell, or hear it.

Then read section 2.1, Mathematics, by "Thought" can "verify" concepts
in the domain that can not be "Proven" by mean analytic proof.

You either need to consider that "Thought" as a sense, or admit that not
all Analytic Statements are provable.

>
>> Once you do that, then all the pesky mathematical problems disapper to
>> analytics, because they have been moved outside the domain.
>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ∴ True(x) only exists on the basis of the semantic connections that
>>>>> x has or fails to have. This is another way of saying the True(x)
>>>>> is based on Provable(x) as these semantic connections are verified
>>>>> or fail verification.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unproven, and thus by its own definition, not True, and ANY
>>>> arguement based on it becomes UNSOND.
>>>
>>> I think that we agree on this.
>>
>> So, you agree that your statement is UNSOUND?
>
> Unproven means unsound. Sound requires proven.

You just showed that you don't know the meaning.

CLAIMING something to be True without proof is Unsound, but an Unproven
fact is mearly unknown.

The Collbatz conjuecture is Unknown as to its Truth, but we KNOW that it
must be either True of False.

The Collbatz Conjecture is NOT "Unsound", because it doesn't assert that
it IS true, just believed to be.

>
>>>
>>>>>>> (Untrue(F, G) and Untrue(F, ~G)) means ~Truth_Bearer(G).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the logics which Gödel is considering all include the law of
>>>>>> the excluded middle. There is no 'untrue' in these systems; only
>>>>>> true and false.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> André
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: Category error

<2wfhK.33761$6dof.29659@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32589&group=comp.theory#32589

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad>
<Wf6dneXnkN5JoR3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5pekc$p7g$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVGEj4068B3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <t5pu9v$c99$2@dont-email.me>
<R7ydnSk3-Ku-4x3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<oD5gK.6562$56e6.2619@fx34.iad>
<EbKdnVJfIrpr-Bn_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<035hK.8428$Yfl6.2831@fx41.iad>
<hL6dnRMh9tb_kRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <hL6dnRMh9tb_kRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 116
Message-ID: <2wfhK.33761$6dof.29659@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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:42:54 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5969
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:42 UTC

On 5/18/22 11:10 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 6:49 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>> On 5/17/22 11:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/15/2022 6:39 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/15/22 12:14 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/14/2022 11:07 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 21:04, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:39 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:35, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The PRESUMES that True -> Provable, which has NOT been proven
>>>>>>>>>> (so isnt' True by its own words), and only applies in a system
>>>>>>>>>> that accepts it as a basis, so it can be true.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is simply the way that correct reasoning works and when
>>>>>>>>> logic diverges from this it becomes incorrect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where exactly can one read up on this 'correct reasoning'? Can
>>>>>>>> you point us to a source where its axioms and rules of inference
>>>>>>>> are collected?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or is this just some vague concept that exists only in your head?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Its in my head, I have begun to elborate it in my other reply to
>>>>>>> you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given your dismally poor track record where even basic reasoning
>>>>>> is concerned, why should anyone be interested in your particular
>>>>>> view of what constitutes 'correct reasoning'?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> André
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can define it so that it can be seen to be self-evidently correct.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Given your track record, that makes it almost certainly wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Self-Evident, for logic, is a GROUP decision, that the group accepts
>>>> it as self-evident and usable as a basis for common understanding.
>>>>
>>>
>>> A self-evident truth proves that it is completely true entirely on
>>> the basis of its meaning. If everyone in the universe disagrees then
>>> everyone in the universe is wrong.
>>
>> A self-evident truth requires ALL (or all reasonable) to aggree that
>> it is true.
>
>
> Not at all. THAT IS NOT THE WAY IT IS DEFINED.
>
>> If someone sees something as true that no one else does, that is not
>> "self-evident truth", that is DELUSION.
>>
>>>
>>>> YOU fail with that definition.
>>>>
>>>> Also "can be Seen to be self-evidently correct" is a good
>>>> description of most of the fallicies, and many of the errors, they
>>>> might APPEAR to be self-evident, but on closer examination prove to
>>>> be wrong.
>>>
>>>
>>> “Analytic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are doctors,” have
>>> historically been characterized as ones that are true by virtue of
>>> the meanings of their words alone and/or can be known to be so solely
>>> by knowing those meanings.
>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
>>>
>>
>> Analyses of philosophically important terms and concepts, such as
>> “material object,” “cause,” “freedom,” or “knowledge” turned out,
>> however, to be far more problematic than philosophers had anticipated,
>> ...
>>
>
> It was only the quoted paragraph that was significant.
> Every expression of formal or natural language that can be determined to
> be true entirely on the basis of its meaning is an analytic expression
> language.

The PROVE that "The Square of the Hypotonuse of a Right Triangle is
equal to the Sum of the Squares of the other two sides" on the basis of
its meaning.

Or, is that NOT a analytic expression, and thus, most of mathematics is
not dispite your "stipuation".

>
>> I will note that if you read through that article (I will admit I just
>> scanned it) it talks a lot about how mathematics cause PROBLEMS for
>> the analytic philosophies, and how to try to handle it.
>>
>> I note it largely is talking about KNOWLEDGE, not actual TRUTH. it
>> also talks about how to try to LIMIT the domain of the logic to that
>> which can be reasoned (i.e. proved).
>>
>> Yes, this is a valid domain to work in, but it CAN'T handle
>> "Mathematics" in the full sense, so can't be used to "Disprove" things
>> like the Halting Problem or the Incomplentness Theorem, because the
>> logics that define those problems are outside the domain that such a
>> logic can handle.
>>
>> You just don't understand that basic property of logic.
>
>

Re: Category error

<tzfhK.22442$j0D5.19884@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32590&group=comp.theory#32590

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<h55hK.8429$Yfl6.4221@fx41.iad>
<76WdnRd_N9qpkBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <76WdnRd_N9qpkBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <tzfhK.22442$j0D5.19884@fx09.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:46:28 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5086
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:46 UTC

On 5/18/22 11:13 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 6:51 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/17/22 10:59 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/15/2022 4:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2022-05-14 16:05:55 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
>>>>
>>>>> The other day I claimed there was a category error in the halting
>>>>> theorem proof but I was mistaken: the category error actually
>>>>> exists in
>>>>> Pete Olcott's understanding of the proof which manifests as an
>>>>> infinite
>>>>> recursion in his simulation; his simulation is thus invalid and
>>>>> doesn't
>>>>> refute anything of substance.
>>>>
>>>> Olcott's error contains an indirect recursion that is or is not
>>>> infinite
>>>> depending on details of his H.
>>>
>>> The key point is that the correct simulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>> never reaches its own final state thus never halts.
>>>
>>>> It is not possible to point a single
>>>> statement of the program and say that the error is there, as there are
>>>> other points that could be changed so that the infinite recursion
>>>> disappears.
>>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>>>
>>> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine
>>> address with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the
>>> infinite recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting
>>> behavior pattern.
>>
>> No, it didn't, at least NOT with a "Correct Trace". It sees it a trace
>> of P where H has been replaced with just a call to its input.
>>
>
> When we know that H only performs a pure simulation of its input then we
> don't need to see the hundreds of pages of execution trace of H.
>
> SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS HUNDREDS OF TIMES YOU ARE BEING QUITE DESPICABLY
> DISHONEST ABOUT THIS.

And you keep lying about it.

Since P(P) NEVER calls another copy of P, the fact that the trace shows
this happening PROVES it is not a correct trace, unless you are going to
admit that H mearly calls its input (at least when called by P).

Once P calls H, the ONLY code that is executed (if H is a simulator) is
the code of H, NEVER do we get back to P.

Note, then you need to explain how it is still a actual computation when
the outer H behaves differently (since the behavior of a computaiton is
ONLY a function of its parameters, so is can't know that it is being
called by P).

>
>> Since that is NOT what H is, the logic is based on a false premise, an
>> is thus unsound.
>>
>> If you are defining that to be correct, then your logic is incorrrect,
>> or at least NOT the "Halting Problem".
>>
>> All you have done is maybe show that your H can decides your POOP
>> correctly, not Halting.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> A category error is different: it is contained in a single sentence
>>>> where one word or phase is incompatible with the place where it is put.
>>>>
>>>> Mikko
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: Category error

<pBfhK.22443$j0D5.11388@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32591&group=comp.theory#32591

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.uzoreto.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <84mdncZ3-IYNjhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <84mdncZ3-IYNjhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <pBfhK.22443$j0D5.11388@fx09.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:48:36 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2948
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:48 UTC

On 5/18/22 11:41 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>
>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>> entering a simulator.
>>
>
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT H PERFORMS A PURE SIMULATION
> OF ITS INPUT THUS HAS NO BEHAVIOR THAT CAN HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
> BEHAVIOR OF ITS INPUT THUS NO NEED TO SEE ITS HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF
> EXECUTION TRACE ???

The the trace needs to just stop at the call to H, but then you don't
have anything to point at to "prove" your statement.

>
>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I think
>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>
>
> YOU ARE SUCH A JACKASS. (and much better programmer than I knew).
>
>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.  It's just
>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>
>
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<rDfhK.22444$j0D5.9843@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32592&group=comp.theory#32592

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 143
Message-ID: <rDfhK.22444$j0D5.9843@fx09.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:50:47 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 8025
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:50 UTC

On 5/18/22 12:49 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>
>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>> entering a simulator.
>>
>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I think
>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>
>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.  It's just
>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>
>
> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>
> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>
> #include <stdint.h>
> #define u32 uint32_t
>
> void P(u32 x)
> {
>   if (H(x, x))
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
> }
>
> _P()
> [00001352](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001353](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001355](03)  8b4508          mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00001358](01)  50              push eax
> [00001359](03)  8b4d08          mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [0000135c](01)  51              push ecx
> [0000135d](05)  e840feffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001362](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001365](02)  85c0            test eax,eax
> [00001367](02)  7402            jz 0000136b
> [00001369](02)  ebfe            jmp 00001369
> [0000136b](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [0000136c](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0027) [0000136c]
>
> _main()
> [00001372](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001373](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001375](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137a](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137f](05)  e81efeffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001384](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001387](01)  50              push eax
> [00001388](05)  6823040000      push 00000423 // "Input_Halts = "
> [0000138d](05)  e8e0f0ffff      call 00000472 // call Output
> [00001392](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001395](02)  33c0            xor eax,eax
> [00001397](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [00001398](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0039) [00001398]
>
>     machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>     address   address   data      code       language
>     ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> ...[00001372][0010229e][00000000] 55         push ebp
> ...[00001373][0010229e][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001375][0010229a][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137a][00102296][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137f][00102292][00001384] e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H

And the trace starts to LIE right here unless H actually calls P

> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
> with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
> recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.

But H is seeing things, since it is looking at an incorrect trace,
unless the H that P called did just call P, then H is proven to NOT be a
computation as H(P,P) does different things at different times.

>
> ...[00001384][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001387][0010229a][00000000] 50         push eax
> ...[00001388][00102296][00000423] 6823040000 push 00000423 //
> "Input_Halts = "
> ---[0000138d][00102296][00000423] e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
> Input_Halts = 0
> ...[00001392][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001395][0010229e][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> ...[00001397][001022a2][00100000] 5d         pop ebp
> ...[00001398][001022a6][00000004] c3         ret
> Number_of_User_Instructions(1)
> Number of Instructions Executed(15892)
>
>
> Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5
>
>
>

Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<BNSdnX8SbuPUGhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32593&group=comp.theory#32593

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
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: Wed, 18 May 2022 18:54:49 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 18:54:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me>
<o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pu7e$c99$1@dont-email.me>
<R7ydnS43-Kt14B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Ew5gK.6021$i7Ab.749@fx05.iad>
<EbKdnVNfIrrQ-Bn_nZ2dnUU7_8xQAAAA@giganews.com> <4P4hK.9996$dLI5.27@fx48.iad>
<FpWdnTPKrfH5lhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1kfhK.1148$cvmb.863@fx06.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <1kfhK.1148$cvmb.863@fx06.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <BNSdnX8SbuPUGhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 198
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-wJTqYZXRE1UqGgKYOrO2XE5E9ne+Xb9Yq0Hw+Db3vI3+s5RJzyA/9h+cUN26hNvIKKFyR7zriBwh2Yd!tqsC99Lqvts533c7HRbhYgF7INEwVeFQQwQ6oGFGxskl6o1DaBGnKukD8F/qMMlIbbTEri4ugCI=
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: 9652
 by: olcott - Wed, 18 May 2022 23:54 UTC

On 5/18/2022 6:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/18/22 11:06 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/18/2022 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/17/22 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/15/2022 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/15/22 12:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 11:06 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 21:02, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Massachusetts and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read
>>>>>>>>>>>> Godel's paper at this point either, so he makes the same
>>>>>>>>>>>> error you do of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a
>>>>>>>>>>> private journal which was never intended for publication
>>>>>>>>>>> (which explains why he never bothered to retract this remark
>>>>>>>>>>> once the error became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have been
>>>>>>>>>>> pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet people make proofs over infinite sets all the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as semantic
>>>>>>>> connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their
>>>>>>>> meaning through semantic connections.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument. And
>>>>>>> your use of the term 'analytic' doesn't seem to correspond to the
>>>>>>> standard usage. The analytic/synthetic distinction is one that
>>>>>>> normally arises when talking about the philosophy of language,
>>>>>>> not logic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is not how proofs work. You're the one making a claim. The
>>>>>>> burden of proof lies with you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And your specific claims are far too vaguely defined for anyone
>>>>>>> to track down counterexamples. For example, I have absolutely no
>>>>>>> idea what you mean by 'semantic connection'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will make that one concrete.
>>>>>> Try to provide a sentence that is true that is not connected to
>>>>>> anything else that shows that it is true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> One of:
>>>>>
>>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is True.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is False.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is connected to tautology.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope. We know that one of the sentences is true.
>>>
>>> THAT sentence is not establisned by "Tautology"
>>>
>>> That sentence being true disproves your statement.
>>>
>>
>> You did not provide an example of a sentence that is true that is not
>> connected to anything else that shows that it is true.
>
> One of these sentences is such an example, I don't know which one:
>
> The Collbatz conjecture is True.
>
> The Collbatz conjecture is False.

Then you did not meet my challenge.

>
>
> The fact that I don't know which one doesn't make the arguement invalid,
> it points out that there is a limit to knowledge.
>
> A second example.
>
> Godel sentence G is True.
>
> You may not accept that it is True, but it is. To quote from one of your
> favorite sources:
>

G is not true in F the same way and for the same reason that the Liar
Paradox is not true.

When we move outside of self-contradiction into Tarski's meta-theory it
is true that the liar paradox is not true in Tarski's theory.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
>
> The Gödel sentence is designed to refer, indirectly, to itself. The
> sentence states that, when a particular sequence of steps is used to
> construct another sentence, that constructed sentence will not be
> provable in F. However, the sequence of steps is such that the
> constructed sentence turns out to be GF itself. In this way, the Gödel
> sentence GF indirectly states its own unprovability within F (Smith
> 2007, p. 135).
>

Exactly the same as Tarski.

> To prove the first incompleteness theorem, Gödel demonstrated that the
> notion of provability within a system could be expressed purely in terms
> of arithmetical functions that operate on Gödel numbers of sentences of
> the system. Therefore, the system, which can prove certain facts about
> numbers, can also indirectly prove facts about its own statements,
> provided that it is effectively generated. Questions about the
> provability of statements within the system are represented as questions
> about the arithmetical properties of numbers themselves, which would be
> decidable by the system if it were complete.
>
> Thus, although the Gödel sentence refers indirectly to sentences of the
> system F, when read as an arithmetical statement the Gödel sentence
> directly refers only to natural numbers. It asserts that no natural
> number has a particular property, where that property is given by a
> primitive recursive relation (Smith 2007, p. 141). As such, the Gödel
> sentence can be written in the language of arithmetic with a simple
> syntactic form. In particular, it can be expressed as a formula in the
> language of arithmetic consisting of a number of leading universal
> quantifiers followed by a quantifier-free body (these formulas are at
> level Π 1 0 {\displaystyle \Pi _{1}^{0}} \Pi _{1}^{0} of the
> arithmetical hierarchy). Via the MRDP theorem, the Gödel sentence can be
> re-written as a statement that a particular polynomial in many variables
> with integer coefficients never takes the value zero when integers are
> substituted for its variables (Franzén 2005, p. 71).
>
>
> So the Godel sentence, being "Just" a mathematical sentence, if
> definitionally a Truth Bearer, and either needs to be True, or it is False.
>
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<XYOdneAS57aFFBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32595&group=comp.theory#32595

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
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: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:02:32 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 19:02:31 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me>
<o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9u5gK.6020$i7Ab.3784@fx05.iad>
<EbKdnVBfIrpJ-Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1k5hK.8430$Yfl6.562@fx41.iad>
<65WdnVtH4_ccjBj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<0ufhK.33760$6dof.24551@fx13.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <0ufhK.33760$6dof.24551@fx13.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <XYOdneAS57aFFBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 222
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-VZwKOlxrTjAIeKcBG8zzxBCg/7U8o0rGHU2yOLCd8RRh6gQ0xoLgcq9QY9RVQAixTQfdEk7uvFgf0cD!uJ8VEgevGjOqPZrognm+2iGSXC7ZRyJi8YNQJDh0blPEUZBncVNllGvDG3pxEDLlydowlIhjBwk=
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: 9445
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:02 UTC

On 5/18/2022 6:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/18/22 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/18/2022 7:07 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/17/22 11:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/15/2022 6:29 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/14/22 11:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge, Massachusetts
>>>>>>>>>>> and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read Godel's
>>>>>>>>>> paper at this point either, so he makes the same error you do
>>>>>>>>>> of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a
>>>>>>>>> private journal which was never intended for publication (which
>>>>>>>>> explains why he never bothered to retract this remark once the
>>>>>>>>> error became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have been
>>>>>>>>> pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as semantic
>>>>>> connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their meaning
>>>>>> through semantic connections.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>>
>>>>> Which PROVES that you don't know the meaning of the word PROOF.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Proof generically means that an expression of language has been
>>>> definitely established as true by some means.
>>>>
>>>>> By that standard, Collatz, and the Twin Primes, amoung many others,
>>>>> are PROVED.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> STANDARD_MEANING:
>>>>>> (c) Analytic expressions of language are only true on the basis of
>>>>>> their meaning.
>>>>>
>>>>> Source? That actually mean True, as opossed to just "Known True".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That is the definition of analytic truth.
>>>>
>>>> “Analytic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are doctors,” have
>>>> historically been characterized as ones that are true by virtue of
>>>> the meanings of their words alone and/or can be known to be so
>>>> solely by knowing those meanings.
>>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
>>>
>>> Note "Historically", that was what was assumed to be a characteristic
>>> of such statements, that they could be shown true or false by a
>>> manner of proof.
>>>
>>> Then, we got the proof that some statements, that might want to be
>>> called analytic couldn't be proven or disproven.
>>>
>>
>> There is no freaking "might want" there is only <is> and <not is>.
>> If you "might want the definitions of a term to be different than it
>> is then you are simply screwy.
>
> A century ago, Math was thought to be Analytical, and all Analytical
> statements eventually provable or refutable. It was then discovered that
> this can not be true.
>

Math a stipulated to be in the body of analytical statements the same
way that a dog is stipulated to be an animal.

> You need to decide, either you remove Mathematics from Analytical or you
> remove Provable from Analytically True.
>

Not at all. This is where logic diverges form correct reasoning.
Cannot possibly be proved = untrue.

>>
>>> As pointed out, in part, the question is "Is Mathematics Analytic",
>>> or is it more emperical.
>>>
>>
>> It is stipulated that math and logic are purely analytical.
>
> Then there exists analytical statements that are True but not Provable.
>
> That is PROVEN.

Unprovable in F means untrue in F.
Remove the self-contradiction then we get provable and true.

>
>>
>>> Can "The Square of the Hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares
>>> of the other two sides", be actually thought of as a ANALYTIC proof,
>>> doesn't it truth come out of the MEANING of the words, or is it an
>>> emperical truth show to be true because it just works.
>>>
>>
>> Empirical means that you must be able to taste, touch, smell, or hear it.
>
> Then read section 2.1, Mathematics, by "Thought" can "verify" concepts
> in the domain that can not be "Proven" by mean analytic proof.

If math contradicts its philosophical foundation then math is wrong.

>
> You either need to consider that "Thought" as a sense, or admit that not
> all Analytic Statements are provable.
>

In the same way I will take my pet office building for a walk.

>>
>>> Once you do that, then all the pesky mathematical problems disapper
>>> to analytics, because they have been moved outside the domain.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ∴ True(x) only exists on the basis of the semantic connections
>>>>>> that x has or fails to have. This is another way of saying the
>>>>>> True(x) is based on Provable(x) as these semantic connections are
>>>>>> verified or fail verification.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Unproven, and thus by its own definition, not True, and ANY
>>>>> arguement based on it becomes UNSOND.
>>>>
>>>> I think that we agree on this.
>>>
>>> So, you agree that your statement is UNSOUND?
>>
>> Unproven means unsound. Sound requires proven.
>
> You just showed that you don't know the meaning.
>

Validity and Soundness
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be
invalid.

A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all
of its premises are actually true. Otherwise, a deductive argument is
unsound.
https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/

Deductive inference is a kind of proof.

> CLAIMING something to be True without proof is Unsound, but an Unproven
> fact is mearly unknown.
>

impossisble to prove = untrue.

> The Collbatz conjuecture is Unknown as to its Truth, but we KNOW that it
> must be either True of False.
>
> The Collbatz Conjecture is NOT "Unsound", because it doesn't assert that
> it IS true, just believed to be.
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> (Untrue(F, G) and Untrue(F, ~G)) means ~Truth_Bearer(G).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And the logics which Gödel is considering all include the law of
>>>>>>> the excluded middle. There is no 'untrue' in these systems; only
>>>>>>> true and false.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<vYfhK.9709$Q0Ef.7158@fx38.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32598&group=comp.theory#32598

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
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!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx38.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad> <G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad> <8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me> <va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me> <o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me> <zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pu7e$c99$1@dont-email.me> <R7ydnS43-Kt14B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <Ew5gK.6021$i7Ab.749@fx05.iad> <EbKdnVNfIrrQ-Bn_nZ2dnUU7_8xQAAAA@giganews.com> <4P4hK.9996$dLI5.27@fx48.iad> <FpWdnTPKrfH5lhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1kfhK.1148$cvmb.863@fx06.iad> <BNSdnX8SbuPUGhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <BNSdnX8SbuPUGhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 207
Message-ID: <vYfhK.9709$Q0Ef.7158@fx38.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 20:13:14 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 9781
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:13 UTC

On 5/18/22 7:54 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 6:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/18/22 11:06 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/18/2022 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/17/22 11:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/15/2022 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/15/22 12:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 11:06 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 21:02, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Massachusetts and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godel's paper at this point either, so he makes the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>> error you do of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a
>>>>>>>>>>>> private journal which was never intended for publication
>>>>>>>>>>>> (which explains why he never bothered to retract this remark
>>>>>>>>>>>> once the error became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have
>>>>>>>>>>>> been pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not
>>>>>>>>>>> Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yet people make proofs over infinite sets all the time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as
>>>>>>>>> semantic connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their
>>>>>>>>> meaning through semantic connections.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Again, this is simply a baseless assertion, not an argument. And
>>>>>>>> your use of the term 'analytic' doesn't seem to correspond to
>>>>>>>> the standard usage. The analytic/synthetic distinction is one
>>>>>>>> that normally arises when talking about the philosophy of
>>>>>>>> language, not logic.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is not how proofs work. You're the one making a claim. The
>>>>>>>> burden of proof lies with you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And your specific claims are far too vaguely defined for anyone
>>>>>>>> to track down counterexamples. For example, I have absolutely no
>>>>>>>> idea what you mean by 'semantic connection'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will make that one concrete.
>>>>>>> Try to provide a sentence that is true that is not connected to
>>>>>>> anything else that shows that it is true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is True.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Collbatz conjecture is False.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That is connected to tautology.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope. We know that one of the sentences is true.
>>>>
>>>> THAT sentence is not establisned by "Tautology"
>>>>
>>>> That sentence being true disproves your statement.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You did not provide an example of a sentence that is true that is not
>>> connected to anything else that shows that it is true.
>>
>> One of these sentences is such an example, I don't know which one:
>>
>> The Collbatz conjecture is True.
>>
>> The Collbatz conjecture is False.
>
> Then you did not meet my challenge.
>
>>
>>
>> The fact that I don't know which one doesn't make the arguement
>> invalid, it points out that there is a limit to knowledge.
>>
>> A second example.
>>
>> Godel sentence G is True.
>>
>> You may not accept that it is True, but it is. To quote from one of
>> your favorite sources:
>>
>
> G is not true in F the same way and for the same reason that the Liar
> Paradox is not true.
>
> When we move outside of self-contradiction into Tarski's meta-theory it
> is true that the liar paradox is not true in Tarski's theory.
>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems
>>
>> The Gödel sentence is designed to refer, indirectly, to itself. The
>> sentence states that, when a particular sequence of steps is used to
>> construct another sentence, that constructed sentence will not be
>> provable in F. However, the sequence of steps is such that the
>> constructed sentence turns out to be GF itself. In this way, the Gödel
>> sentence GF indirectly states its own unprovability within F (Smith
>> 2007, p. 135).
>>
>
> Exactly the same as Tarski.

Sort of, and just as True.

>
>> To prove the first incompleteness theorem, Gödel demonstrated that the
>> notion of provability within a system could be expressed purely in
>> terms of arithmetical functions that operate on Gödel numbers of
>> sentences of the system. Therefore, the system, which can prove
>> certain facts about numbers, can also indirectly prove facts about its
>> own statements, provided that it is effectively generated. Questions
>> about the provability of statements within the system are represented
>> as questions about the arithmetical properties of numbers themselves,
>> which would be decidable by the system if it were complete.
>>
>> Thus, although the Gödel sentence refers indirectly to sentences of
>> the system F, when read as an arithmetical statement the Gödel
>> sentence directly refers only to natural numbers. It asserts that no
>> natural number has a particular property, where that property is given
>> by a primitive recursive relation (Smith 2007, p. 141). As such, the
>> Gödel sentence can be written in the language of arithmetic with a
>> simple syntactic form. In particular, it can be expressed as a formula
>> in the language of arithmetic consisting of a number of leading
>> universal quantifiers followed by a quantifier-free body (these
>> formulas are at level Π 1 0 {\displaystyle \Pi _{1}^{0}} \Pi _{1}^{0}
>> of the arithmetical hierarchy). Via the MRDP theorem, the Gödel
>> sentence can be re-written as a statement that a particular polynomial
>> in many variables with integer coefficients never takes the value zero
>> when integers are substituted for its variables (Franzén 2005, p. 71).
>>
>>
>> So the Godel sentence, being "Just" a mathematical sentence, if
>> definitionally a Truth Bearer, and either needs to be True, or it is
>> False.
>>
>>
>
> It is NOT a truth bearer.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]

<c3ghK.15280$x1Wf.7775@fx10.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32599&group=comp.theory#32599

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ --KEY_INSIGHT-- ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<tdKdnQC2Q9inQuL_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tPUfK.189$SWc6.187@fx44.iad>
<G7KdnTUzU-qUgR3_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<TcVfK.6636$j0D5.3767@fx09.iad>
<8IOdnQUS39_Rux3_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <t5p979$q10$1@dont-email.me>
<va-dnZMHj_bJth3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<nwWfK.24088$JSxf.7488@fx11.iad> <t5pdh0$k9t$1@dont-email.me>
<o9KdncqVOZBkpx3_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <t5pe74$o0t$1@dont-email.me>
<zaKdnVaEj43X8B3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<9u5gK.6020$i7Ab.3784@fx05.iad>
<EbKdnVBfIrpJ-Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<1k5hK.8430$Yfl6.562@fx41.iad>
<65WdnVtH4_ccjBj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<0ufhK.33760$6dof.24551@fx13.iad>
<XYOdneAS57aFFBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <XYOdneAS57aFFBj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 261
Message-ID: <c3ghK.15280$x1Wf.7775@fx10.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 20:20:24 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 10492
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:20 UTC

On 5/18/22 8:02 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 6:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/18/22 11:32 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/18/2022 7:07 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/17/22 11:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/15/2022 6:29 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/14/22 11:02 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:32 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:27, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2022 6:21 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-05-14 17:00, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/22 6:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1983. Remarks on the Foundations of
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mathematics (Appendix III), 118-119.Cambridge, Massachusetts
>>>>>>>>>>>> and London, England: The MIT Press
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And, my understanding is that Wittgestein hadn't read Godel's
>>>>>>>>>>> paper at this point either, so he makes the same error you do
>>>>>>>>>>> of know knowing what he is talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There is one crucial difference -- Wittgenstein recorded his
>>>>>>>>>> initial reactions to first hearing of Gödel's proof in a
>>>>>>>>>> private journal which was never intended for publication
>>>>>>>>>> (which explains why he never bothered to retract this remark
>>>>>>>>>> once the error became clear to him).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Olcott, on the other hand, is intent on broadcasting his
>>>>>>>>>> misunderstanding to the world even after his errors have been
>>>>>>>>>> pointed out to him repeatedly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> André
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Unprovable(F, G) merely means Untrue(F, G) and not Incomplete(F).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's an assertion, not an argument.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some of these terms are from standard analytic philosophy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proofs over infinite sets can be tricky.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KEY_INSIGHT:
>>>>>>> (a) The proof is that the entire body of analytic knowledge
>>>>>>> (including all math, logic, et cetera) is structured as semantic
>>>>>>> connections between elements of this same body.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (b) All analytic expressions of language only obtain their
>>>>>>> meaning through semantic connections.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *The proof of these two is that no counter-examples can be found*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which PROVES that you don't know the meaning of the word PROOF.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Proof generically means that an expression of language has been
>>>>> definitely established as true by some means.
>>>>>
>>>>>> By that standard, Collatz, and the Twin Primes, amoung many
>>>>>> others, are PROVED.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> STANDARD_MEANING:
>>>>>>> (c) Analytic expressions of language are only true on the basis
>>>>>>> of their meaning.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Source? That actually mean True, as opossed to just "Known True".
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That is the definition of analytic truth.
>>>>>
>>>>> “Analytic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are doctors,” have
>>>>> historically been characterized as ones that are true by virtue of
>>>>> the meanings of their words alone and/or can be known to be so
>>>>> solely by knowing those meanings.
>>>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
>>>>
>>>> Note "Historically", that was what was assumed to be a
>>>> characteristic of such statements, that they could be shown true or
>>>> false by a manner of proof.
>>>>
>>>> Then, we got the proof that some statements, that might want to be
>>>> called analytic couldn't be proven or disproven.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no freaking "might want" there is only <is> and <not is>.
>>> If you "might want the definitions of a term to be different than it
>>> is then you are simply screwy.
>>
>> A century ago, Math was thought to be Analytical, and all Analytical
>> statements eventually provable or refutable. It was then discovered
>> that this can not be true.
>>
>
> Math a stipulated to be in the body of analytical statements the same
> way that a dog is stipulated to be an animal.

Then you have to accept that some Analytical Statements are True but not
Provable,

>
>> You need to decide, either you remove Mathematics from Analytical or
>> you remove Provable from Analytically True.
>>
>
> Not at all. This is where logic diverges form correct reasoning.
> Cannot possibly be proved = untrue.

I think all you have done is proved that your "Correct Reasoning" is
incorrect.

>
>>>
>>>> As pointed out, in part, the question is "Is Mathematics Analytic",
>>>> or is it more emperical.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is stipulated that math and logic are purely analytical.
>>
>> Then there exists analytical statements that are True but not Provable.
>>
>> That is PROVEN.
>
> Unprovable in F means untrue in F.
> Remove the self-contradiction then we get provable and true.

Nope, not if F can support enough Mathematics.

Your logic system is obviously now inconsistent.

>
>>
>>>
>>>> Can "The Square of the Hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares
>>>> of the other two sides", be actually thought of as a ANALYTIC proof,
>>>> doesn't it truth come out of the MEANING of the words, or is it an
>>>> emperical truth show to be true because it just works.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Empirical means that you must be able to taste, touch, smell, or hear
>>> it.
>>
>> Then read section 2.1, Mathematics, by "Thought" can "verify" concepts
>> in the domain that can not be "Proven" by mean analytic proof.
>
> If math contradicts its philosophical foundation then math is wrong.

Go ahead, announce you new logic idea, and point out that to accept it
you need to throw out the centuries of development of mathematics
because it must all be wrong.

I think you may be able to hear the crickets after that.

>
>>
>> You either need to consider that "Thought" as a sense, or admit that
>> not all Analytic Statements are provable.
>>
>
> In the same way I will take my pet office building for a walk.

Yes, do that, it makes as much sense as your other statements.

>
>>>
>>>> Once you do that, then all the pesky mathematical problems disapper
>>>> to analytics, because they have been moved outside the domain.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ∴ True(x) only exists on the basis of the semantic connections
>>>>>>> that x has or fails to have. This is another way of saying the
>>>>>>> True(x) is based on Provable(x) as these semantic connections are
>>>>>>> verified or fail verification.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unproven, and thus by its own definition, not True, and ANY
>>>>>> arguement based on it becomes UNSOND.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that we agree on this.
>>>>
>>>> So, you agree that your statement is UNSOUND?
>>>
>>> Unproven means unsound. Sound requires proven.
>>
>> You just showed that you don't know the meaning.
>>
>
> Validity and Soundness
> A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
> that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
> nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be
> invalid.
>
> A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all
> of its premises are actually true. Otherwise, a deductive argument is
> unsound.
> https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
>
> Deductive inference is a kind of proof.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32600&group=comp.theory#32600

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Followup: 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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Followup-To: comp.theory
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 01:57:59 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_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="da8ddcdaf15a63bedebc6b20b5367945";
logging-data="27106"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18EVbsaMBdwHGX0o+rqCdwG/3f7JWDQ5G0="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v6VYIj/uYUIcYjLUpuWfGpbi0a0=
sha1:c7uDHaVXe1ag5iDI74uP1B1GOPQ=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.fdfce365698e6b8b32e9.20220519015759BST.87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:57 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>> entering a simulator.
>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>
> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.

Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
trace? You should be clear on this point.

> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.

Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have, not a made up
edited trace, or a trace of some other function altogether. Though what
I really want if fo you to be brave enough to publish H.

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

Re: Category error

<87leuy8hjt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32601&group=comp.theory#32601

 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: Category error
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 01:58:14 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <87leuy8hjt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<84mdncZ3-IYNjhj_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="da8ddcdaf15a63bedebc6b20b5367945";
logging-data="27106"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18cKBYb7T03PnoB94qg0kB47gmlKrZOc+A="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y3HJruOlwrZHnH5PvB1sOaIaFDk=
sha1:MXU0jjdzn7C9volWK9mZsvEknno=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.e3ed6f12a01ff65a919c.20220519015814BST.87leuy8hjt.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:58 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>> entering a simulator.
>
> HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT H PERFORMS A PURE SIMULATION
> OF ITS INPUT THUS HAS NO BEHAVIOR THAT CAN HAVE ANY EFFECT ON THE
> BEHAVIOR OF ITS INPUT THUS NO NEED TO SEE ITS HUNDREDS OF PAGES OF
> EXECUTION TRACE ???

You can tell me that as often as you like. I will repeat -- your trace
is at best deceptive by omission, at worst a deliberate lie being the
trace of a function entirely unlike the one you pretend. We can can't
tell which until you publish H, which will never happen.

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

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32603&group=comp.theory#32603

 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: Wed, 18 May 2022 20:20:43 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 20:20:42 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 63
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-3LhNvwgamGGOGV6QjM0c8S6EqD2XHzn15OQosAWbd4etde5TV+nDVPizJE1JRYkvRpBuf2q4hjseVDS!ijfK5rX3ykV457/0zvzKe46Iuo4G2gdtbIdFv+9woFXbv0rRPp6Phj5/d/zQgfLtCliIxdorOCk=
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: 4247
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 01:20 UTC

On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>> entering a simulator.
>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>
>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>
> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
> trace? You should be clear on this point.

THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?

>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>
> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,

IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.

I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.

> not a made up
> edited trace, or a trace of some other function altogether. Though what
> I really want if fo you to be brave enough to publish H.
>

THIS IS THE ACTUAL TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) THAT H ACTUALLY PRODUCES.

--
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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<rRhhK.12745$C7G6.5409@fx46.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32604&group=comp.theory#32604

 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!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx46.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <rRhhK.12745$C7G6.5409@fx46.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: Wed, 18 May 2022 22:22:14 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4593
X-Original-Bytes: 4460
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 02:22 UTC

On 5/18/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but
>>>> it's
>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I think
>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.  It's just
>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>
>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>
>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>
> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?

Why? Since the code of H is PART of P, since it is called by it.

Thus the COMPUTAION of P includes ALL the code of H as part of it, H
needs to take it into account.

>
>>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
>>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
>>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>>
>> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,
>
> IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
> DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
> ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.
>
> I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.

It has been pointed out that it is IMPOSSIBLE for that trace to actually
be correct.

How can you make a valid deduction from an incorrect trace.

>
>> not a made up
>> edited trace, or a trace of some other function altogether.  Though what
>> I really want if fo you to be brave enough to publish H.
>>
>
> THIS IS THE ACTUAL TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) THAT H ACTUALLY PRODUCES.
>

Then you H is broken (or a liar) as H can not just call its input and
also be a simulator and also be an actual computation.

Thus either your H is a liar, or YOU are. (actually, either way you are
the liar as you made H and are certifying that it is correct).

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32605&group=comp.theory#32605

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
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, 19 May 2022 00:26:21 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 00:26:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 77
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-14nWC9mk2ar6Pc+ZEjOuXFL7Udiow7rutevRRxvD44Ndq1cO4rhHOprtXsgiZinTyHCUuk2V2pTGdLv!vsdMts5At9hCiDGwdMUSFgCHaeSqB+waDpZ2x/MsNA6G7+LLagynJrJlyeULE3iDolwABuFnQUM=
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: 4973
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 05:26 UTC

On 5/18/2022 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but
>>>> it's
>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I think
>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.  It's just
>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>
>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>
>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>
> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>
>>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
>>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
>>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>>
>> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,
>
> IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
> DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
> ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.
>
> I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.

I only want to treat you fairly and with honesty. Now that you have
finally demonstrated excellent programming skills I finally have a basis
to know a key aspect of your technical skills that were never previously
confirmed.

Anyone with the skills that you demonstrated that never saw the x86
language ever before would be able to correctly analyze the execution
trace of the input to H(P,P) and confirm that it is correct.

>
>> not a made up
>> edited trace, or a trace of some other function altogether.  Though what
>> I really want if fo you to be brave enough to publish H.
>>
>
> THIS IS THE ACTUAL TRACE OF THE INPUT TO H(P,P) THAT H ACTUALLY PRODUCES.
>

--
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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<182fe08f-27bd-4ffd-abf0-f77a7b2ccdden@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32606&group=comp.theory#32606

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:188a:b0:2f3:f4a8:ac9b with SMTP id v10-20020a05622a188a00b002f3f4a8ac9bmr2975708qtc.396.1652948955644;
Thu, 19 May 2022 01:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:512:b0:64a:afe8:e94f with SMTP id
x18-20020a056902051200b0064aafe8e94fmr3233632ybs.297.1652948955427; Thu, 19
May 2022 01:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.mixmin.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 01:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23a8:400a:5601:6984:bfeb:430d:92f;
posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23a8:400a:5601:6984:bfeb:430d:92f
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <182fe08f-27bd-4ffd-abf0-f77a7b2ccdden@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 08:29:15 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: Malcolm McLean - Thu, 19 May 2022 08:29 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 06:26:28 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
> On 5/18/2022 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> > On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
> >> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
> >>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> >>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
> >>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
> >>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
> >>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
> >>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> >>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
> >>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> >>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
> >>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
> >>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but
> >>>> it's
> >>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
> >>>> entering a simulator.
> >>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
> >>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
> >>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
> >>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
> >>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
> >>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
> >>>
> >>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
> >>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
> >>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
> >>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
> >>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
> >>
> >> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
> >> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
> >> trace? You should be clear on this point.
> >
> > THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
> >
> >>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
> >>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
> >>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
> >>
> >> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,
> >
> > IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
> > DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
> > ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.
> >
> > I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.
> I only want to treat you fairly and with honesty. Now that you have
> finally demonstrated excellent programming skills I finally have a basis
> to know a key aspect of your technical skills that were never previously
> confirmed.
>
> Anyone with the skills that you demonstrated that never saw the x86
> language ever before would be able to correctly analyze the execution
> trace of the input to H(P,P) and confirm that it is correct.
>
P calls H. But H, as you have described it, doesn't call P. It emulates it.
But the trace seems to show a call. The infinite cycle detector, as you
have described it is based on a call.

So it's unclear what is going on. And it turns out that the traces are edited.
So is the second part of the trace the output of the emulated emulator?

That seems the best explanation, but we can't be sure that this is going on.

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32607&group=comp.theory#32607

 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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 12:56:34 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_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="da8ddcdaf15a63bedebc6b20b5367945";
logging-data="6613"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18TOaHWs+jIHcdvriEb7iM8564cf3wvC94="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4JDpcwEhWvokxvSbqkKCh0LpDv0=
sha1:fQEsy8VqoUkNNUWXvBYL7U1+WFw=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.2ee9feb5efcb0b15c469.20220519125634BST.87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 19 May 2022 11:56 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>
>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>
>> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>> trace? You should be clear on this point.
>
> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?

Another question you won't answer. What are you hiding?

We already know that H is not deciding the halting instance that it
should (i.e. whether the call P(P) halts or not) but it also seems you
are being deceptive about what H is really doing.

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

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<CM-dnREoLoiE-Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32608&group=comp.theory#32608

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
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, 19 May 2022 10:41:13 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 10:41:11 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<182fe08f-27bd-4ffd-abf0-f77a7b2ccdden@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <182fe08f-27bd-4ffd-abf0-f77a7b2ccdden@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <CM-dnREoLoiE-Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 105
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-7NPX9nxYgOOKKINssbKM0Knm5tr8nKzpbZqCYR0lVKs4BdfW7dosK2ptMOyN/hrORXM2qA92TeQ4w35!5er3Oz2WwnCzviM5ogKntG7zn6B5LyP34BmjlZfnie8db9pWG99+o2cL4t4kkvwpoUHd0tK6d0w=
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: 6589
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 15:41 UTC

On 5/19/2022 3:29 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 06:26:28 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/18/2022 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but
>>>>>> it's
>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>
>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>>>> trace? You should be clear on this point.
>>>
>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>>
>>>>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
>>>>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
>>>>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,
>>>
>>> IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
>>> DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
>>> ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.
>>>
>>> I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.
>> I only want to treat you fairly and with honesty. Now that you have
>> finally demonstrated excellent programming skills I finally have a basis
>> to know a key aspect of your technical skills that were never previously
>> confirmed.
>>
>> Anyone with the skills that you demonstrated that never saw the x86
>> language ever before would be able to correctly analyze the execution
>> trace of the input to H(P,P) and confirm that it is correct.
>>
> P calls H. But H, as you have described it, doesn't call P. It emulates it.
> But the trace seems to show a call. The infinite cycle detector, as you
> have described it is based on a call.
>
> So it's unclear what is going on.

It is a little annoying that I have to say this 150 times and people
can't remember that I said it even once. I take this as head games.
H(P,P) emulates its input that calls H(P,P) that emulates its input.

Because H only emulates the first 7 instructions of its input H cannot
possibly have any effect on the behavior of this input. This means that
there is no need to see the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.

Furthermore we can easily verify that these first 7 instructions of P
are emulated correctly because the execution trace provided by H exactly
matches the behavior specified by these first 7 instructions of P.

> And it turns out that the traces are edited.

I removed some of the extraneous debug information about the memory
allocation. A normal execution trace would not show this. I changed the
source-code so that it doesn't display this.

My purpose in providing the memory allocation information was to prove
that there really are several independent processes. H(P,P) emulating
its input that calls H(P,P) that emulates its input.

> So is the second part of the trace the output of the emulated emulator?
>

The first 7 lines are emulated by the emulator, the second 7 lines are
emulated by the emulated emulator.

> That seems the best explanation, but we can't be sure that this is going on.

--
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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32609&group=comp.theory#32609

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
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, 19 May 2022 10:48:43 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 10:48:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 79
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-aUu6wPFIxoLEkOFHjZ2e2scs6clIJtDdywe5Scc8RC6eGIv3qarSmDkRv+Q1Xtm6z4LDa3YDM//mPRL!ydoZJS3T+vxcRDiQOs+bURHZaEtqja9umvHMFNqhBo4goaMmNsJtBvFaMz/CUKX0B9QpUJccBDo=
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: 5496
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 15:48 UTC

On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>
>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>
>>> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>>> trace? You should be clear on this point.
>>
>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>
> Another question you won't answer. What are you hiding?

A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
information that you have consistently proven incapable of comprehending.

>
> We already know that H is not deciding the halting instance that it
> should (i.e. whether the call P(P) halts or not) but it also seems you
> are being deceptive about what H is really doing.
>

Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
....[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
....[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.

--
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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<Y3uhK.85$vAW9.70@fx10.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32610&group=comp.theory#32610

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<kZadnWtOuoZgSRj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<182fe08f-27bd-4ffd-abf0-f77a7b2ccdden@googlegroups.com>
<CM-dnREoLoiE-Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <CM-dnREoLoiE-Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 164
Message-ID: <Y3uhK.85$vAW9.70@fx10.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, 19 May 2022 12:16:55 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 8454
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:16 UTC

On 5/19/22 11:41 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/19/2022 3:29 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>> On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 06:26:28 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/18/2022 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored
>>>>>>>> at:212352
>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      //
>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      //
>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 //
>>>>>>>> call H
>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but
>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I
>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally
>>>>>>> honest
>>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.
>>>>>>> It's just
>>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating"
>>>>>>> and H
>>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing
>>>>> the
>>>>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>>>>
>>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>>>
>>>>>> BECAUSE OF THIS THE INSISTENCE ON SEEING THE HUNDREDS OF
>>>>>> PAGES OF THE EXECUTION TRACE OF H OR THE SOURCE-CODE OF H
>>>>>> IS A JACKASS MOVE THAT IS ONLY PLAYING HEAD GAMES.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I want to see a trace of the function you claim have,
>>>>
>>>> IF YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THE TRACE THAT H PRODUCES THAT H CORRECTLY
>>>> DECIDES ITS INPUT YOU SIMPLY ARE NOT ANYWHERE IN THE BALLPARK SMART
>>>> ENOUGH TO CORRECTLY ANALYZE MY WORK.
>>>>
>>>> I AM MUCH MORE APT TO BELIEVE DISHONEST RATHER THAN STUPID.
>>> I only want to treat you fairly and with honesty. Now that you have
>>> finally demonstrated excellent programming skills I finally have a basis
>>> to know a key aspect of your technical skills that were never previously
>>> confirmed.
>>>
>>> Anyone with the skills that you demonstrated that never saw the x86
>>> language ever before would be able to correctly analyze the execution
>>> trace of the input to H(P,P) and confirm that it is correct.
>>>
>> P calls H. But H, as you have described it, doesn't call P. It
>> emulates it.
>> But the trace seems to show a call. The infinite cycle detector, as you
>> have described it is based on a call.
>>
>> So it's unclear what is going on.
>
>
> It is a little annoying that I have to say this 150 times and people
> can't remember that I said it even once. I take this as head games.
> H(P,P) emulates its input that calls H(P,P) that emulates its input.

But that isn't what the trace shows. The second trace of P is NOT what
actually happens.

>
> Because H only emulates the first 7 instructions of its input H cannot
> possibly have any effect on the behavior of this input. This means that
> there is no need to see the 237 pages of the execution trace of H.
>

But it DOES have inpact on the copy of P that calls it, and because H
needes

> Furthermore we can easily verify that these first 7 instructions of P
> are emulated correctly because the execution trace provided by H exactly
> matches the behavior specified by these first 7 instructions of P.

Except that you don't correctly emulate the REST of P, which includes
the code of H. The "copy" of H that P calls is part of the execution
history of the Program P.
>
>> And it turns out that the traces are edited.
>
> I removed some of the extraneous debug information about the memory
> allocation. A normal execution trace would not show this. I changed the
> source-code so that it doesn't display this.

Maybe it is H that edits it itself. Still says the trace is NOT a trace
of the execution path of the PROGRAM P.

"Subroutine" P is not a computation by itself. The bytes you are calling
the "representation" of P is not comp[ete. This just shows that you are
just lying about following the proof.

>
> My purpose in providing the memory allocation information was to prove
> that there really are several independent processes. H(P,P) emulating
> its input that calls H(P,P) that emulates its input.

But you don't show the ACTUAL execution trace of what the program P
does, which after P calls H is to start emulating the input that P gave
to the function H. Remember, the PROGRAM P, includes as part of its code
ALL the code that would be executed if you directly execute P as an
independent program, which includes all of H, and anything H uses.

>
>> So is the second part of the trace the output of the emulated emulator?
>>
>
> The first 7 lines are emulated by the emulator, the second 7 lines are
> emulated by the emulated emulator.

SO NOT a trace of the emulation of the P that the top level H is
deciding on.

THAT is the error. The transformation of an emulation of an emulator to
the emulation of the emulated code is ONLY valid for unconditional
emulation, which H does not do.

So, that transformation is an INVALID logical operation, and thus makes
your whole arguemet INCORRECT.

My guess (and will admit that it is only a guess) is that your H doesn't
actually have the code to emulate, but that H is just an API into your
overall simulation system, which is INCAPABLE of actually emulating its
emulation of the input (and thus switches to showing the trace of the
code being emulated by the emulator and not the emulation of that code
(with its conditionals to abort on what it INCORRECT decides in infinite
recursion). This make your H NOT actually meeting the requirements of a
Computation that is the equivalent of a Turing Machine.

>
>> That seems the best explanation, but we can't be sure that this is
>> going on.
>

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<88uhK.2$lut9.1@fx99.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32611&group=comp.theory#32611

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx99.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc> <t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <88uhK.2$lut9.1@fx99.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, 19 May 2022 12:21:24 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5864
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:21 UTC

On 5/19/22 11:48 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored
>>>>>>> at:212352
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what,
>>>>>> but it's
>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I think
>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally
>>>>>> honest
>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.  It's
>>>>>> just
>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>
>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>>>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>>>
>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>
>> Another question you won't answer.  What are you hiding?
>
> A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
> information that you have consistently proven incapable of comprehending.
>
>>
>> We already know that H is not deciding the halting instance that it
>> should (i.e. whether the call P(P) halts or not) but it also seems you
>> are being deceptive about what H is really doing.
>>
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H

The LIE starts here.

NO CPU will go to address 00001352 as a result of a call 000011A2.

Thus, this is NOT a correct trace.

Since you are basing you analysis on a FALSE trace, your results are
invalid.

You are just proving that your setup is BROKEN.

> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
> with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
> recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.
>

Nope, please provide a reference to this that includes handling a
CONDITIONAL emulation in the loop.

You are just proving that your knowledge of this sort of thing is abismal

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32617&group=comp.theory#32617

 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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:19:29 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me>
<-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_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="da8ddcdaf15a63bedebc6b20b5367945";
logging-data="32403"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18b2byegFXVn0yXkfAgeiFCxigkXaYRKNA="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:zQhEx9TSV1F6Vxe/vyApC+f8+Is=
sha1:+9H6k1eLYetJs0W95BDe88my6Kg=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.e0dfe35b228099f55b11.20220519201929BST.874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 19 May 2022 19:19 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>
>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>
>>>> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>>>> trace? You should be clear on this point.
>>>
>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>> Another question you won't answer. What are you hiding?
>
> A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
> information that you have consistently proven incapable of
> comprehending.

You'll have to make it public one day, unless chatting on here is your
only objective. No one will take deceptively edited traces as evidence
of anything but you being shifty, and since you've already abandoned any
pretence at talking about the halting problem, all you have is this
faked-up trace of the simulation.

H(P,P) == false is wrong about the halting of P(P) and the trace does
not back-up what you say your H is doing. There's nothing left here.

But there's always the TM emulator... How's that coming along?

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

Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32619&group=comp.theory#32619

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
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, 19 May 2022 14:36:27 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 14:36:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 177
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-ATWpeAcMCk/v2qIxvhfHaChe7G4HTK55qLfwMr+II1a3v9d7LSaDnCRCwA0DCvZ0GlgJw1xzPHmb3Hz!uEDG7+HA52a/8/LE/7PdSGT37XcdwaGPN2Fr9eY0bP1sS9QNsBwEraNzkm2rkqWf48j0k8UoDIo=
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: 9390
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 19:36 UTC

On 5/19/2022 2:19 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
>>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
>>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
>>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking about.
>>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what, but it's
>>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on. I think
>>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally honest
>>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does. It's just
>>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating" and H
>>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ah, "if". So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify editing the
>>>>> trace? You should be clear on this point.
>>>>
>>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>> Another question you won't answer. What are you hiding?
>>
>> A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
>> information that you have consistently proven incapable of
>> comprehending.
>
> You'll have to make it public one day, unless chatting on here is your
> only objective.

ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
CORRECT.

#include <stdint.h>
#define u32 uint32_t

void P(u32 x)
{ if (H(x, x))
HERE: goto HERE;
return;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
}

_P()
[00001352](01) 55 push ebp
[00001353](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001355](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00001358](01) 50 push eax
[00001359](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[0000135c](01) 51 push ecx
[0000135d](05) e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
[00001362](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
[00001365](02) 85c0 test eax,eax
[00001367](02) 7402 jz 0000136b
[00001369](02) ebfe jmp 00001369
[0000136b](01) 5d pop ebp
[0000136c](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0027) [0000136c]

_main()
[00001372](01) 55 push ebp
[00001373](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001375](05) 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
[0000137a](05) 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
[0000137f](05) e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
[00001384](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
[00001387](01) 50 push eax
[00001388](05) 6823040000 push 00000423 // "Input_Halts = "
[0000138d](05) e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
[00001392](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
[00001395](02) 33c0 xor eax,eax
[00001397](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001398](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0039) [00001398]

machine stack stack machine assembly
address address data code language
======== ======== ======== ========= =============
....[00001372][0010229e][00000000] 55 push ebp
....[00001373][0010229e][00000000] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001375][0010229a][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
....[0000137a][00102296][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
....[0000137f][00102292][00001384] e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H

Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
....[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
....[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
....[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec mov ebp,esp
....[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
....[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
....[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
....[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
....[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.

....[00001384][0010229e][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08
....[00001387][0010229a][00000000] 50 push eax
....[00001388][00102296][00000423] 6823040000 push 00000423 //
"Input_Halts = "
---[0000138d][00102296][00000423] e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
Input_Halts = 0
....[00001392][0010229e][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08
....[00001395][0010229e][00000000] 33c0 xor eax,eax
....[00001397][001022a2][00100000] 5d pop ebp
....[00001398][001022a6][00000004] c3 ret
Number_of_User_Instructions(1)
Number of Instructions Executed(15892) = 237 pages

> No one will take deceptively edited traces as evidence
> of anything but you being shifty, and since you've already abandoned any
> pretence at talking about the halting problem, all you have is this
> faked-up trace of the simulation.

ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
CORRECT.

ONE CAN VERIFY THAT THE EXECUTION TRACE IS CORRECT ON THE BASIS THAT THE
EXECUTION TRACE PROVIDED CORRESPONDS TO THE X86 SOURCE-CODE OF H(P,P)
EMULATING ITS INPUT CALLING H(P,P) THAT EMULATES ITS INPUT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU DON'T SEE THIS.

> H(P,P) == false is wrong about the halting of P(P) and the trace does
> not back-up what you say your H is doing. There's nothing left here.
>
> But there's always the TM emulator... How's that coming along?
>

There are about two lines of code that are out-of-place. I have been ill
and had other issues that I had to deal with.

--
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: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]

<5axhK.4$Rvub.2@fx35.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32620&group=comp.theory#32620

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx35.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/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 219
Message-ID: <5axhK.4$Rvub.2@fx35.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, 19 May 2022 15:48:17 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 10924
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 19 May 2022 19:48 UTC

On 5/19/22 3:36 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/19/2022 2:19 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored
>>>>>>>>> at:212352
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      //
>>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      //
>>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 //
>>>>>>>>> call H
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking
>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what,
>>>>>>>> but it's
>>>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally
>>>>>>>> honest
>>>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.
>>>>>>>> It's just
>>>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating"
>>>>>>>> and H
>>>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify
>>>>>> editing the
>>>>>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>>> Another question you won't answer.  What are you hiding?
>>>
>>> A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
>>> information that you have consistently proven incapable of
>>> comprehending.
>>
>> You'll have to make it public one day, unless chatting on here is your
>> only objective.
>
> ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
> LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
> CORRECT.
>
> #include <stdint.h>
> #define u32 uint32_t
>
> void P(u32 x)
> {
>   if (H(x, x))
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
> }
>
> _P()
> [00001352](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001353](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001355](03)  8b4508          mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00001358](01)  50              push eax
> [00001359](03)  8b4d08          mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [0000135c](01)  51              push ecx
> [0000135d](05)  e840feffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001362](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001365](02)  85c0            test eax,eax
> [00001367](02)  7402            jz 0000136b
> [00001369](02)  ebfe            jmp 00001369
> [0000136b](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [0000136c](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0027) [0000136c]
>
> _main()
> [00001372](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001373](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001375](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137a](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137f](05)  e81efeffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001384](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001387](01)  50              push eax
> [00001388](05)  6823040000      push 00000423 // "Input_Halts = "
> [0000138d](05)  e8e0f0ffff      call 00000472 // call Output
> [00001392](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001395](02)  33c0            xor eax,eax
> [00001397](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [00001398](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0039) [00001398]
>
>     machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>     address   address   data      code       language
>     ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> ...[00001372][0010229e][00000000] 55         push ebp
> ...[00001373][0010229e][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001375][0010229a][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137a][00102296][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137f][00102292][00001384] e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
> with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
> recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.

But the trace is false, so the application of the rule is incorrect.

H sees P calling H which CONDITIONALLY simulates P which calls H

The CONDITIONAL simulation break your "rule"

FAIL

>
> ...[00001384][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001387][0010229a][00000000] 50         push eax
> ...[00001388][00102296][00000423] 6823040000 push 00000423 //
> "Input_Halts = "
> ---[0000138d][00102296][00000423] e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
> Input_Halts = 0
> ...[00001392][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001395][0010229e][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> ...[00001397][001022a2][00100000] 5d         pop ebp
> ...[00001398][001022a6][00000004] c3         ret
> Number_of_User_Instructions(1)
> Number of Instructions Executed(15892) = 237 pages
>
>
>> No one will take deceptively edited traces as evidence
>> of anything but you being shifty, and since you've already abandoned any
>> pretence at talking about the halting problem, all you have is this
>> faked-up trace of the simulation.
>
> ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
> LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
> CORRECT.


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)

<1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32621&group=comp.theory#32621

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.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, 19 May 2022 15:53:04 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 15:53:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Category error [ HEAD GAMES ] (clearer words)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
References: <20220514170555.00004550@reddwarf.jmc>
<t5qg8m$rlp$1@dont-email.me> <-YWdnXUTXaNq_Rn_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0qq2lr.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <EuidnURwxcY6vhj_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o7zu8hk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <04qdnQ2ArKr2Bhj_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87a6bd91n1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <RuGdnaqBNspG-xv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1l8h4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <Y7idnfd_v--hARv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <1K6dnX9xHfmtMxv_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 203
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-u9tbxI+H9SuGWkq1PWCGO6QGJP8kIDGimhtmRkdW9jk5k492BKao/HcnCCTqabypB3EJWC4q96hiV0D!+21f5bASYoqYW2Jumjw/Qo75wSwIooBk8mCOrFzGzOftEsYvq4WRUwTyS0kH3Dnz9Q82b03Z2dg=
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: 10559
 by: olcott - Thu, 19 May 2022 20:53 UTC

On 5/19/2022 2:36 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/19/2022 2:19 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/19/2022 6:56 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/18/2022 7:57 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/18/2022 10:31 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored
>>>>>>>>> at:212352
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      //
>>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
>>>>>>>>> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      //
>>>>>>>>> push P
>>>>>>>>> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 //
>>>>>>>>> call H
>>>>>>>>> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      //
>>>>>>>>> enter P
>>>>>>>> This can't be the trace of the function you have been talking
>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>> The H you claim to have simulates something (no one cares what,
>>>>>>>> but it's
>>>>>>>> something) so the code at the start of H should be setting up and
>>>>>>>> entering a simulator.
>>>>>>>> You've admitted you edit some traces which is really not on.  I
>>>>>>>> think
>>>>>>>> you should stop posting them until you can be honest about them.
>>>>>>>> Mind you, my personally guess is that the trace is fundamentally
>>>>>>>> honest
>>>>>>>> about you've been pulling our legs about what H really does.
>>>>>>>> It's just
>>>>>>>> the top-level x86 emulator that does that does any "simulating"
>>>>>>>> and H
>>>>>>>> really does call P which calls H which calls P...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ON THE BASIS OF THE X86 MACHINE CODE PROVIDED FOR P AND THE
>>>>>>> EXECUTION TRACE OF P PROVIDED BY H IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT
>>>>>>> THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P IS THE EXECUTION TRACE OF P THAT
>>>>>>> WOULD OCCUR IF H PERFORMED A PURE SIMULATION OF THE FIRST
>>>>>>> 13 INSTRUCTIONS OF P.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, "if".  So you admit that you are tracing an H this is not the one
>>>>>> you have been describing, or are you just trying to justify
>>>>>> editing the
>>>>>> trace?  You should be clear on this point.
>>>>>
>>>>> THE TRACE OF H IS IRRELEVANT, WHAT ARE YOU STUPID?
>>>> Another question you won't answer.  What are you hiding?
>>>
>>> A confusing mess of ridiculously complex and totally irrelevant
>>> information that you have consistently proven incapable of
>>> comprehending.
>>
>> You'll have to make it public one day, unless chatting on here is your
>> only objective.
>
> ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
> LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
> CORRECT.
>
> #include <stdint.h>
> #define u32 uint32_t
>
> void P(u32 x)
> {
>   if (H(x, x))
>     HERE: goto HERE;
>   return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
> }
>
> _P()
> [00001352](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001353](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001355](03)  8b4508          mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00001358](01)  50              push eax
> [00001359](03)  8b4d08          mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [0000135c](01)  51              push ecx
> [0000135d](05)  e840feffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001362](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001365](02)  85c0            test eax,eax
> [00001367](02)  7402            jz 0000136b
> [00001369](02)  ebfe            jmp 00001369
> [0000136b](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [0000136c](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0027) [0000136c]
>
> _main()
> [00001372](01)  55              push ebp
> [00001373](02)  8bec            mov ebp,esp
> [00001375](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137a](05)  6852130000      push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137f](05)  e81efeffff      call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001384](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001387](01)  50              push eax
> [00001388](05)  6823040000      push 00000423 // "Input_Halts = "
> [0000138d](05)  e8e0f0ffff      call 00000472 // call Output
> [00001392](03)  83c408          add esp,+08
> [00001395](02)  33c0            xor eax,eax
> [00001397](01)  5d              pop ebp
> [00001398](01)  c3              ret
> Size in bytes:(0039) [00001398]
>
>     machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>     address   address   data      code       language
>     ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> ...[00001372][0010229e][00000000] 55         push ebp
> ...[00001373][0010229e][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001375][0010229a][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137a][00102296][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137f][00102292][00001384] e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55         push ebp      // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508     mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50         push eax      // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08     mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51         push ecx      // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
> with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
> recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.
>
> ...[00001384][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001387][0010229a][00000000] 50         push eax
> ...[00001388][00102296][00000423] 6823040000 push 00000423 //
> "Input_Halts = "
> ---[0000138d][00102296][00000423] e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
> Input_Halts = 0
> ...[00001392][0010229e][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> ...[00001395][0010229e][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> ...[00001397][001022a2][00100000] 5d         pop ebp
> ...[00001398][001022a6][00000004] c3         ret
> Number_of_User_Instructions(1)
> Number of Instructions Executed(15892) = 237 pages
>
>
>> No one will take deceptively edited traces as evidence
>> of anything but you being shifty, and since you've already abandoned any
>> pretence at talking about the halting problem, all you have is this
>> faked-up trace of the simulation.
>
> ANYONE WITH SUFFICIENT TECHNICAL COMPETENCE THAT IS NOT A GOD DAMNED
> LIAR KNOWS THAT I ALREADY TOTALLY PROVED MY POINT THAT H(P,P)==0 IS
> CORRECT.
>


Click here to read the complete article
Pages:123456789101112
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor