Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

fortune: No such file or directory

devel / comp.theory / Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

SubjectAuthor
* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
+* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
|`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
| `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
|  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|   +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
|   |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|   | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
|   |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|   |   `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
|   `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
|    `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|     `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
|      `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|       `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
|        `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
|         `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
+* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMd thiebaud
|`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
| +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
| |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
| | `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
| `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMSkep Dick
|  `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
+* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Harnden
|`- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
 `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inolcott
   |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |   `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |    `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |     `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |      `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |       `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |        `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |         `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |          `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |           `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |            `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |             `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |              `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |               `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                 `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                   `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                    `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                     `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                      `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                       `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                        `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |+- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMSkep Dick
   |                         | +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMSkep Dick
   |                         |  +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         |  | +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         |  | | +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | | |`- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         |  | | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |+- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  | +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |  +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |   +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |   `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |    +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |    `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |     `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my olcott
   |                         |  | |  |      `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |       `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my olcott
   |                         |  | |  |        `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |         +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |         `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |          +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |          `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |           +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my olcott
   |                         |  | |  |           `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |            +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            |   +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |   `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            +* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |`* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            |   `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            |    `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published inMr Flibble
   |                         |  | |  |            |     `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   |                         |  | |  |            +- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  |            `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMDennis Bush
   |                         |  | |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMRichard Damon
   |                         |  | `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMdklei...@gmail.com
   |                         |  `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMSkep Dick
   |                         `* Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott
   `- Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACMolcott

Pages:12345678910
Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<tdhifn$aq4k$1@dont-email.me>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37850&group=comp.theory#37850

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:06:46 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <tdhifn$aq4k$1@dont-email.me>
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:06:47 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="542198104ee9e03b512ea8f93c2cba80";
logging-data="354452"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/83DFshxEjYBylUR8PDFZK"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:klfmZS78hfH7cX3VXtcMQO0yOjA=
In-Reply-To: <rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:06 UTC

On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>> trolls).
>>>
>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>
>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>
>>
>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>
>
> No,

A correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P) of its input means that H
did not aborts its simulation.

H predicts what this behavior would be in a finite number of steps the
same way that it predicts (in a finite number of steps) that infinite
recursion would never stop running.

*This now builds under Ubuntu 16.04 with Makefile*
https://www.liarparadox.org/2022_08_16.zip

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37851&group=comp.theory#37851

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:12:51 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:12:52 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="542198104ee9e03b512ea8f93c2cba80";
logging-data="357301"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+C8c0IRGPWX40t//PtSrYU"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mfSUbyCD2Vr2P8vunlqoFsTNufE=
In-Reply-To: <rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:12 UTC

On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>> trolls).
>>>
>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>
>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>
>>
>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>
>
> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>

I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be

YOU TWIST THESE WORDS TO MEAN THAT I AM CLAIMING THAT H DID PERFORM A
CORRECT AND COMPLETE EMULATION

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37853&group=comp.theory#37853

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:15:55 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:16:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Otqdnd4GfKOiNWT_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<KZhKK.772181$zgr9.340328@fx13.iad>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<hNmdnTqYmv8gk2b_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Y%KKK.773110$ssF.166440@fx14.iad>
<39icnb0bmt6BAmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<ynXKK.223939$9j2.17199@fx33.iad>
<XJ-dneoKoqxP3mH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 71
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-bKAxTqldQiAZRk8zZtQZu8Yeha4815JTMDvRyu+H87sFnAT0JXGc1njnuqQMBRPNN49kZsYBtFMqzwh!NZRYmtQc/ocAaWuSWJAiJi1Jb8vjptsvza+GXxPknLrcNKLiJC/eDF0WbC0OnbLAfueshkBa6z4=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:16 UTC

On 8/16/2022 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/16/22 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 8:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/16/22 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/15/22 11:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> The C function H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and
>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of its input would never stop running
>>>>>> unless and until it aborts its x86 emulation of this input.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Correct and Complete x86 emulation of the program P(P) Halts,
>>>>
>>>> Again you lie. The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input
>>>> to H(P,P) by H never stops running.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> The problem is that your H (at least those that answer) don't do a
>>> complete and correct x86 emultion of their input, so your statement
>>> is vacuous and unsound.
>>>
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>> correctly predict
>>
>>
>
> How can you correctly predict about a behavior that never happens.

SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS DOZENS OF TIMES EITHER YOU HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE OR
ARE OF DECEITFUL.

The same way that we correctly predict that Infinite_Loop() never stops
running without having to wait forever to see if it stops.

void Infinite_Loop()
{ HERE: goto HERE;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
}

_Infinite_Loop()
[00001102](01) 55 push ebp
[00001103](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001105](02) ebfe jmp 00001105
[00001107](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001108](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37855&group=comp.theory#37855

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:470b:b0:6bb:61ca:9ae9 with SMTP id bs11-20020a05620a470b00b006bb61ca9ae9mr4070365qkb.36.1660703664420;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:34:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a5b:c44:0:b0:684:5fe0:424d with SMTP id
d4-20020a5b0c44000000b006845fe0424dmr14986301ybr.52.1660703664151; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 19:34:24 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:34:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com> <Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com> <A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad> <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:34:24 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 58
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:34 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> > On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
> >>>>>> WOULD
> >>>>>> never stop running.
> >>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
> >>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
> >>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
> >>>> trolls).
> >>>
> >>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
> >>>
> >>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
> >>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
> >>>> reject this input as non-halting.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
> >>>
> >>
> >> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
> >> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>
> >
> > No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> > of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
> >
>
> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be

The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.

The H that does a correct and complete simulation is Hn, and the P that call it is Pn. So with that in mind, let's rewrite the above to make it clear what you actually mean:

> I said that Ha correctly predicts what the behavior of the correct and
> complete x86 emulation of Hn(Pn,Pn) would be

So you're again claiming that Ha(Pa,Pa) reports the halt status of the non-input Pn(Pn), which is not the question a halt decider is required to answer:

For *any* algorithm X and input Y:
H(X,Y)==1 if and only if X(Y) halts, and
H(X,Y)==0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt

Therefore Ha(Pa,Pa)==0 is wrong.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<3798b386-31b6-44af-9e01-6ca3aeb7ef0an@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37857&group=comp.theory#37857

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d89:b0:479:6726:7f42 with SMTP id e9-20020a0562140d8900b0047967267f42mr20027823qve.20.1660703737903;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:bfc6:0:b0:67c:22b9:3c60 with SMTP id
q6-20020a25bfc6000000b0067c22b93c60mr19044434ybm.454.1660703737754; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 19:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Otqdnd4GfKOiNWT_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <KZhKK.772181$zgr9.340328@fx13.iad>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<hNmdnTqYmv8gk2b_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <Y%KKK.773110$ssF.166440@fx14.iad>
<39icnb0bmt6BAmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <ynXKK.223939$9j2.17199@fx33.iad>
<XJ-dneoKoqxP3mH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
<HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3798b386-31b6-44af-9e01-6ca3aeb7ef0an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:35:37 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 46
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:35 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:16:24 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> > On 8/16/22 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 8:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 8/16/22 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>> On 8/15/22 11:28 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> The C function H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and
> >>>>>> complete x86 emulation of its input would never stop running
> >>>>>> unless and until it aborts its x86 emulation of this input.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, it doesn't.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Correct and Complete x86 emulation of the program P(P) Halts,
> >>>>
> >>>> Again you lie. The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input
> >>>> to H(P,P) by H never stops running.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The problem is that your H (at least those that answer) don't do a
> >>> complete and correct x86 emultion of their input, so your statement
> >>> is vacuous and unsound.
> >>>
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >> correctly predict
> >>
> >>
> >
> > How can you correctly predict about a behavior that never happens.
> SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS DOZENS OF TIMES EITHER YOU HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE OR
> ARE OF DECEITFUL.
>
> The same way that we correctly predict that Infinite_Loop() never stops
> running without having to wait forever to see if it stops.

The difference is that an Infinite_Loop() that doesn't halt does exist, while an Ha(Pa,Pa) which does a correct and complete simulation does not exist.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<jAYKK.733788$5fVf.616983@fx09.iad>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37858&group=comp.theory#37858

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer02.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/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhifn$aq4k$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <tdhifn$aq4k$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <jAYKK.733788$5fVf.616983@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: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:42:23 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4053
X-Original-Bytes: 3920
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:42 UTC

On 8/16/22 10:06 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by
>>>>>>> H WOULD
>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>> trolls).
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>
>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does
>>>>> correctly reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>
>>
>> No,
>
> A correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P) of its input means that H
> did not aborts its simulation.

And the H that doesn't abort its simulation doesn't answer.

>
> H predicts what this behavior would be in a finite number of steps the
> same way that it predicts (in a finite number of steps) that infinite
> recursion would never stop running.

But then it ISN'T the behavior of the H that is ACTUALLY called by P
that H is looking at, but of a DIFFERENT H.

Your H just mis-simulates its input because it INCORRECTLY assumes the
wrong behavior of the H that P calls.

>
>
> *This now builds under Ubuntu 16.04 with Makefile*
> https://www.liarparadox.org/2022_08_16.zip
>
>
>
>

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<iDYKK.733789$5fVf.202237@fx09.iad>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37859&group=comp.theory#37859

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.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/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <iDYKK.733789$5fVf.202237@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: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:45:34 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4080
X-Original-Bytes: 3947
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:45 UTC

On 8/16/22 10:12 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by
>>>>>>> H WOULD
>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>> trolls).
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>
>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does
>>>>> correctly reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>
>>
>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>
>
> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>
> YOU TWIST THESE WORDS TO MEAN THAT I AM CLAIMING THAT H DID PERFORM A
> CORRECT AND COMPLETE EMULATION
>

But it doesn't, as that H isn't the H that is called by P.

You have just admitted that you H isn't actually based on an actual
algorithm.

How can you claim "correctness" based on a behavior that NEVER occurs.

That is an illogic.

H needs to answer about the ACTUAL behavior of the ACTUAL input, not the
hypothetical input if H was something it wasn't.

That is just LYING.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37860&group=comp.theory#37860

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:47:32 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:47:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 83
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-lGBVkM9LmFHzf1E4jg+2Q9kB6ew6fv18NspsTpV4YOZeaUbyxZaONsTgkwzHpNh6Unbe54KiKhQzHdJ!R+C3z9ESyMmwSxC7xIFBpKBm25AmcOCBz7SmthB93YP5DUz5fGFWAfToEDQqnLMq8bjdbqXsSLc=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:47 UTC

On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>>> trolls).
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>
>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>
>>
>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>
> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.

So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.

WHEN THIS RIDICULOUSLY STUPID REASONING IS APPLIED TO Infinite_Loop() IT
MEANS THAT NO HALT DECIDER CAN POSSIBLY BE SMART ENOUGH TO DETECT AN
INFINITE LOOP.

void Infinite_Loop()
{ HERE: goto HERE;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
}

_Infinite_Loop()
[00001102](01) 55 push ebp
[00001103](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001105](02) ebfe jmp 00001105
[00001107](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001108](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<2uqdnbw1ZK8jymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37862&group=comp.theory#37862

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!45.76.7.193.MISMATCH!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:51:42 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:51:59 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<hNmdnTqYmv8gk2b_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Y%KKK.773110$ssF.166440@fx14.iad>
<39icnb0bmt6BAmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<ynXKK.223939$9j2.17199@fx33.iad>
<XJ-dneoKoqxP3mH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
<HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<3798b386-31b6-44af-9e01-6ca3aeb7ef0an@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <3798b386-31b6-44af-9e01-6ca3aeb7ef0an@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <2uqdnbw1ZK8jymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 60
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-CoKJLsvIV7VLd9QA7lMGOC8qedF8IpSuc/F4dr6ZXjIOwloYnmgp/djUdwzOKX5NG6wdertqhkW9ajo!kh9yBlFxsFXY8VLaF1Q8Vz0JVW3u2JLnWA9xA3WLKUeQkaT8BA+AZ55PTn8QqiVQThRRRcf+d0o=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:51 UTC

On 8/16/2022 9:35 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:16:24 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/16/22 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/15/22 11:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> The C function H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and
>>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of its input would never stop running
>>>>>>>> unless and until it aborts its x86 emulation of this input.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, it doesn't.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Correct and Complete x86 emulation of the program P(P) Halts,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again you lie. The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input
>>>>>> to H(P,P) by H never stops running.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that your H (at least those that answer) don't do a
>>>>> complete and correct x86 emultion of their input, so your statement
>>>>> is vacuous and unsound.
>>>>>
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>> correctly predict
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> How can you correctly predict about a behavior that never happens.
>> SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS DOZENS OF TIMES EITHER YOU HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE OR
>> ARE OF DECEITFUL.
>>
>> The same way that we correctly predict that Infinite_Loop() never stops
>> running without having to wait forever to see if it stops.
>
> The difference is that an Infinite_Loop() that doesn't halt does exist, while an Ha(Pa,Pa) which does a correct and complete simulation does not exist.

THIS IS AN AXIOM THAT YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND
It is always that case then when-so-ever H must abort the simulation of
its input to prevent infinite simulation that H is always correct to
report non-halting.

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<2uqdnb81ZK9xymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37863&group=comp.theory#37863

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:52:28 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:52:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<iDYKK.733789$5fVf.202237@fx09.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <iDYKK.733789$5fVf.202237@fx09.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <2uqdnb81ZK9xymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 134
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-QVpcfB9ZsBj/RHZ6jcaHZDW0RG/1FKiX0LEtEMh9P8634Ny5EpirDToZd1ve0jey6FQvdU4VqlK/5n9!6dfVjcbK0EnlQzPVF0c96dUJD/KFomhReTdTt4dJXCz6pu2yM17xi2ZdRW+JiAXwhdKqy5ySzcg=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:52 UTC

On 8/16/2022 9:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/16/22 10:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by
>>>>>>>> H WOULD
>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on
>>>>>> to the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here,
>>>>>> mostly trolls).
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>
>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does
>>>>>> correctly reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete
>>> emulation of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>
>>
>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>
>> YOU TWIST THESE WORDS TO MEAN THAT I AM CLAIMING THAT H DID PERFORM A
>> CORRECT AND COMPLETE EMULATION
>>
>
> But it doesn't, as that H isn't the H that is called by P.
>

I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37864&group=comp.theory#37864

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:17a4:b0:6b6:7ef7:643 with SMTP id ay36-20020a05620a17a400b006b67ef70643mr17563812qkb.759.1660704778629;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:cd81:0:b0:690:47f:f57a with SMTP id
d123-20020a25cd81000000b00690047ff57amr1293001ybf.238.1660704778341; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 19:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com> <Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com> <A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad> <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com> <2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:52:58 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 75
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:52 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
> >>>>>>>> WOULD
> >>>>>>>> never stop running.
> >>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
> >>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
> >>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
> >>>>>> trolls).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering..
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
> >>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
> >>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
> >>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> >>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> >> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
> >
> > The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.

The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist, just like the shoes Napoleon wore on Mars doesn't exist, so there's nothing to predict.

The exact source code of Ha and everything it calls FIXED, as is the source code of Pa and everything it calls (i.e. Ha). So to say what would that source code do if it was something else is nonsense.

The halting problem says that the fixed source code of Ha (and everything it calls) must be able to decide what the fixed source code of Pa (and everything it calls) does when given Pa as input. To postulate what would happen if you had some other code is irrelevant.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<nKYKK.143663$f81.107319@fx43.iad>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37865&group=comp.theory#37865

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx43.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/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<KZhKK.772181$zgr9.340328@fx13.iad>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<hNmdnTqYmv8gk2b_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Y%KKK.773110$ssF.166440@fx14.iad>
<39icnb0bmt6BAmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<ynXKK.223939$9j2.17199@fx33.iad>
<XJ-dneoKoqxP3mH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
<HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 100
Message-ID: <nKYKK.143663$f81.107319@fx43.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: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:53:06 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5267
X-Original-Bytes: 5134
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:53 UTC

On 8/16/22 10:16 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/16/22 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2022 8:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 8/16/22 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2022 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/15/22 11:28 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> The C function H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and
>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of its input would never stop running
>>>>>>> unless and until it aborts its x86 emulation of this input.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it doesn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Correct and Complete x86 emulation of the program P(P) Halts,
>>>>>
>>>>> Again you lie. The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input
>>>>> to H(P,P) by H never stops running.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that your H (at least those that answer) don't do a
>>>> complete and correct x86 emultion of their input, so your statement
>>>> is vacuous and unsound.
>>>>
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>> correctly predict
>>>
>>>
>>
>> How can you correctly predict about a behavior that never happens.
>
> SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS DOZENS OF TIMES EITHER YOU HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE OR
> ARE OF DECEITFUL.
>
> The same way that we correctly predict that Infinite_Loop() never stops
> running without having to wait forever to see if it stops.

Nope, the problem is that the "Pathological" relation of P to H means
that H needs to actually consider its own behavior when deciding on the
behavior of P.

You logic works for the case when that isn't there, as you can actually
PROVE that this input is non-halting.

That proof FAILS for P, because of the interrelationship.

THe problem is that the algorithm you put into H affect the behavior of
the input that H needs to simulate.

You try to argue that H can't affect the behavior of the correct
simulation of the input to H, but that is an incorrect statement when
that input is defined to have a copy of H.

Yes, if you replace the OUTER H, and ONLY that H with something
different, than that change can't affect the behavior of the correct
simulation. So replacing JUST the OUTER H to a UTM, can tell us the
correct and complete simulation of the input, for a given H.

But arguing about changing the algorithm of "H", means you are changing
to a different "P" (even though you didn't change the source code of the
C function P, you changed the behavior of the C computaton P), and can't
use the results of one H for another.

This is where you logic fails. You H considers its input to not be the
input that it has actually been given.

THe Ha class of SHD considers Pa, as if it called the Hn class of SHD,
instead of the Ha that it actually calls, and thus gets the WRONG answer.

>
> void Infinite_Loop()
> {
>   HERE: goto HERE;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
>   Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
> }
>
> _Infinite_Loop()
> [00001102](01)  55         push ebp
> [00001103](02)  8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [00001105](02)  ebfe       jmp 00001105
> [00001107](01)  5d         pop ebp
> [00001108](01)  c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]
>
>

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<f4386719-d243-4411-b139-95cb128d6c11n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37866&group=comp.theory#37866

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2aac:b0:474:8b64:8f56 with SMTP id js12-20020a0562142aac00b004748b648f56mr20787466qvb.0.1660704930024;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:72a:b0:686:6ddb:691c with SMTP id
l10-20020a056902072a00b006866ddb691cmr12549545ybt.632.1660704929851; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 19:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 19:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2uqdnbw1ZK8jymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<hNmdnTqYmv8gk2b_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <Y%KKK.773110$ssF.166440@fx14.iad>
<39icnb0bmt6BAmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <ynXKK.223939$9j2.17199@fx33.iad>
<XJ-dneoKoqxP3mH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <g0YKK.674879$vAW9.366584@fx10.iad>
<HzGdnSyOVdPG0mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <3798b386-31b6-44af-9e01-6ca3aeb7ef0an@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnbw1ZK8jymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f4386719-d243-4411-b139-95cb128d6c11n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:55:30 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 58
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:55 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:52:06 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:35 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:16:24 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 9:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>> On 8/16/22 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 8:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 8/16/22 9:44 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/16/2022 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 8/15/22 11:28 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> The C function H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and
> >>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of its input would never stop running
> >>>>>>>> unless and until it aborts its x86 emulation of this input.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No, it doesn't.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The Correct and Complete x86 emulation of the program P(P) Halts,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Again you lie. The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input
> >>>>>> to H(P,P) by H never stops running.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The problem is that your H (at least those that answer) don't do a
> >>>>> complete and correct x86 emultion of their input, so your statement
> >>>>> is vacuous and unsound.
> >>>>>
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>> correctly predict
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> How can you correctly predict about a behavior that never happens.
> >> SINCE I TOLD YOU THIS DOZENS OF TIMES EITHER YOU HAVE BRAIN DAMAGE OR
> >> ARE OF DECEITFUL.
> >>
> >> The same way that we correctly predict that Infinite_Loop() never stops
> >> running without having to wait forever to see if it stops.
> >
> > The difference is that an Infinite_Loop() that doesn't halt does exist, while an Ha(Pa,Pa) which does a correct and complete simulation does not exist.
> THIS IS AN AXIOM THAT YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND
> It is always that case then when-so-ever H must abort the simulation of
> its input to prevent infinite simulation that H is always correct to
> report non-halting.

FALSE. It's something you made up to convince yourself you didn't waste the last 18 years, which contradicts the definition of what a halt decider is required to do:

For *any* algorithm X and input Y:
H(X,Y)==1 if and only if X(Y) halts, and
H(X,Y)==0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<TOYKK.143664$f81.66784@fx43.iad>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37867&group=comp.theory#37867

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.neodome.net!news.uzoreto.com!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx43.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/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<iDYKK.733789$5fVf.202237@fx09.iad>
<2uqdnb81ZK9xymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <2uqdnb81ZK9xymH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <TOYKK.143664$f81.66784@fx43.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: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:57:55 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4232
 by: Richard Damon - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 02:57 UTC

On 8/16/22 10:52 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/16/22 10:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P)
>>>>>>>>> by H WOULD
>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on
>>>>>>> to the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here,
>>>>>>> mostly trolls).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does
>>>>>>> correctly reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't
>>>>>> see it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete
>>>> emulation of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>>
>>> YOU TWIST THESE WORDS TO MEAN THAT I AM CLAIMING THAT H DID PERFORM A
>>> CORRECT AND COMPLETE EMULATION
>>>
>>
>> But it doesn't, as that H isn't the H that is called by P.
>>
>
> I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID

....
> I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
> I NEVER SAID THAT IT DID
>

Then why do you say that you correctly predict what it would do, if it
could never do that?

Acting like a two year-old again

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37870&group=comp.theory#37870

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:18:20 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:18:38 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 85
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-aJy4576j4r6k7nKP+ykkkPxweqXIIdkwMWF1U5M+P9KA97CLy4VToH01AoIZ93Co50QfrLQQY90T7/1!vg1+kwgXrJ4iCVqPc6yJa1rrN9YTydcDqqh/fyZu+PE30WmyqxQVnDx22aVOxu0DyaDaiM6ILu0=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:18 UTC

On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>>>>> trolls).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>>
>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
>
> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,

Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
NITWIT !!!

void Infinite_Loop()
{ HERE: goto HERE;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
}

_Infinite_Loop()
[00001102](01) 55 push ebp
[00001103](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001105](02) ebfe jmp 00001105
[00001107](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001108](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37871&group=comp.theory#37871

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:ed89:0:b0:6bb:9968:de30 with SMTP id c131-20020ae9ed89000000b006bb9968de30mr36572qkg.774.1660706600745;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a5b:a92:0:b0:67c:3e96:272c with SMTP id
h18-20020a5b0a92000000b0067c3e96272cmr18420917ybq.84.1660706600585; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com> <Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com> <A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad> <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com> <2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com> <u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:23:20 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 60
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:23 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
> >>>>>>>>>> WOULD
> >>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
> >>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
> >>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
> >>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
> >>>>>>>> trolls).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
> >>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
> >>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
> >>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> >>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> >>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
> >>>
> >>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
> >> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
> >> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
> >> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
> >
> > The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()

Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.

An *actual* correct and complete simulation of the input to Ha(Pa,Pa) is done by UTM(Pa,Pa) which halts, so Ha(Pa,Pa)==0 is wrong.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37872&group=comp.theory#37872

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:39:02 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:39:25 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 90
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-U8vDQTH1FEtzclC5KjnfJR92rzyr+gZ9I1LAefPzDHbmaWQ4kFP7R2xRtgSClpBKJxkgs3BxcDacSn/!EtHJq9mwtgTWHj6vd0k6r92j4J78oWAn11fHAiK2m1BbRtIgZMFazi8LeZdFD0Z5qJfZGE4dWvs=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:39 UTC

On 8/16/2022 10:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>>>>>>> trolls).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>>>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>>>>
>>>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
>>>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
>>>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
>>>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
>>>
>>> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
>> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
>
> Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.

When you run H0((u32)Infinite_Loop)
"it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts"

How long are you going to keep the head game up?

void Infinite_Loop()
{ HERE: goto HERE;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
}

_Infinite_Loop()
[00001102](01) 55 push ebp
[00001103](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001105](02) ebfe jmp 00001105
[00001107](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001108](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37873&group=comp.theory#37873

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:561:b0:6b6:1b3a:5379 with SMTP id p1-20020a05620a056100b006b61b3a5379mr16884948qkp.111.1660708413978;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:4212:0:b0:68f:c5aa:79cb with SMTP id
p18-20020a254212000000b0068fc5aa79cbmr2149360yba.307.1660708413721; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 20:53:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad> <rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad> <LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad> <19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad> <3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
<tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me> <e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
<sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:53:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 99
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:53 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:39:32 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 10:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
> >>>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
> >>>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
> >>>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
> >>>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
> >>>>>>>>>> trolls).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
> >>>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
> >>>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
> >>>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> >>>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> >>>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
> >>>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
> >>>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
> >>>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
> >>>
> >>> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
> >> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
> >
> > Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
> When you run H0((u32)Infinite_Loop)
> "it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts"
> How long are you going to keep the head game up?

That you don't understand what I'm saying doesn't make it a head game.

UTM(Infinite_Loop) is a correct and complete simulation, so predicting what it will do is valid. Ha(Pa,Pa) is not a correct and complete simulation, so it makes no sense to predict what the correct and complete simulation performed by Ha(Pa,Pa) would do.

UTM(Pa,Pa) on the other hand is a correct and complete simulation, and *that* is what Ha(Pa,Pa) should be reporting on as per the definition of what a halt decider is required to do:

For *any* algorithm X and input Y:
H(X,Y)==1 if and only if X(Y) halts, and
H(X,Y)==0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<c3Sdnf2c2IG_-mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37874&group=comp.theory#37874

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:57:22 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:57:45 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
<sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <c3Sdnf2c2IG_-mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 84
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-9zZcqWIMGsy1b5LDYafEjy3UVfq4PxIvo3ojmLzYUyUrC6hhTkGOlMpc9E7Q5k479wjKx1qpBjHzLVQ!yoMt/csLy84/4Z5+/dN7B6sGADD5sgeAGhpDpkacWtU5sNj3OzBVv1yHDYWqgX5W2dEirZcr1Cg=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 03:57 UTC

On 8/16/2022 10:53 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:39:32 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 10:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>>>>>>>>> trolls).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>>>>>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
>>>>>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
>>>>>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
>>>>>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
>>>>>
>>>>> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
>>>> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
>>>
>>> Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
>> When you run H0((u32)Infinite_Loop)
>> "it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts"
>> How long are you going to keep the head game up?
>
> That you don't understand what I'm saying doesn't make it a head game.
>

You reject Ha(Pa,Pa) on this basis
run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it
aborts.

Yet accept P0(Infinite_Loop), on the same basis
it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.

∴ You are playing head games.

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<2b06c9cb-4cb3-4866-a4ad-a5e9f10a6270n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37875&group=comp.theory#37875

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:248a:b0:476:93ab:b35e with SMTP id gi10-20020a056214248a00b0047693abb35emr20353419qvb.60.1660708955928;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:6e09:0:b0:676:a087:bb7f with SMTP id
j9-20020a256e09000000b00676a087bb7fmr17689550ybc.248.1660708955667; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 21:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <c3Sdnf2c2IG_-mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=98.110.86.97; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 98.110.86.97
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad> <LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad> <19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad> <3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad>
<tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me> <e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
<sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>
<c3Sdnf2c2IG_-mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2b06c9cb-4cb3-4866-a4ad-a5e9f10a6270n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:02:35 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 107
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:02 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:57:51 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 10:53 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:39:32 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 8/16/2022 10:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
> >>>>>>>>>>>> trolls).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
> >>>>>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>>>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
> >>>>>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
> >>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
> >>>>>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
> >>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
> >>>>>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
> >>>>>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
> >>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
> >>>>>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
> >>>> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
> >>>
> >>> Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
> >> When you run H0((u32)Infinite_Loop)
> >> "it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts"
> >> How long are you going to keep the head game up?
> >
> > That you don't understand what I'm saying doesn't make it a head game.
> >
> You reject Ha(Pa,Pa) on this basis
> run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it
> aborts.
> Yet accept P0(Infinite_Loop), on the same basis
> it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
> ∴ You are playing head games.

What does P0 do? Does it abort? If so, then yes P0(Infinite_Loop) doesn't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts, so it's invalid to predict what the correct and complete simulation of P0(Infinite_Loop) would do.

On the other hand, UTM(Infinite_Loop) does do a correct and complete simulation, so it *is* valid to predict what it will do.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<h_qdnUg9Jqn282H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37879&group=comp.theory#37879

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:28:27 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 23:28:44 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<rUXKK.733786$5fVf.382893@fx09.iad> <tdhir4$astl$1@dont-email.me>
<e669a38a-d240-4a92-aa36-07d3ef57b171n@googlegroups.com>
<2uqdnYI1ZK9Zy2H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<827c17dc-b5c5-4023-b73c-f77925c56c1an@googlegroups.com>
<u8udnaC_csJhwGH_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<cf36a0c8-68d3-4eae-bcc2-39e36c5b1403n@googlegroups.com>
<sySdnc8OUfRL_2H_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<afafbc24-9373-4686-ac19-909a06ffaf79n@googlegroups.com>
<c3Sdnf2c2IG_-mH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<2b06c9cb-4cb3-4866-a4ad-a5e9f10a6270n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <2b06c9cb-4cb3-4866-a4ad-a5e9f10a6270n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <h_qdnUg9Jqn282H_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 113
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-qvcryXS6yBvPzfeOW9BX++j/6wSdUz9vRO3Ljt5/rKNW4dx7Ou1pZsYcKvPheZF7fbuMlIqrCnVZ0MC!VPIuWLuKiaOl/oQCgxW4uMZ6Mi51sAHJdR4MYAWNdhVpOI/9UeTbUgkNDmMJuOpJZaP4yOnRFTo=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:28 UTC

On 8/16/2022 11:02 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:57:51 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 10:53 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:39:32 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/16/2022 10:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 11:18:46 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:52 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 10:12:55 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 9:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 8:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/22 10:27 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2022 9:07 AM, Skep Dick wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, 16 August 2022 at 15:55:30 UTC+2, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The correct and complete x86 emulation of the input to H(P,P) by H
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WOULD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never stop running.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like you are stuck in a loop.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe your Decider/Maker should terminate you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have been trying to get an honest person to acknowledge the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct software engineering of my system so that we can move on to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the next point for a year now. (bot many honest people here, mostly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trolls).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is that what you say ISN'T CORRECT software engineering.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You use the wrong definition of things and incorrect assumptions
>>>>>>>>>>>>> about thing, so it just isn't true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) does correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running, thus does correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reject this input as non-halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. And in fact, you even acknoldge it doesn't but just don't see it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by
>>>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No, I am saying that you H doesn't do a correct and complete emulation
>>>>>>>>>>> of its input, and thus to say it did is just a LIE.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I said that H correctly predicts what the behavior of its correct and
>>>>>>>>>> complete x86 emulation of H(P,P) would be
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The fixed source code of H (and everything it calls) that aborts is Ha. Ha *always* aborts Pa, so "the correct and complete simulation of Ha(Pa,Pa)" does not exist, just like the shoes that Napoleon wore on Mars do not exist.
>>>>>>>> So you are another brain dead moron the believes it is utterly
>>>>>>>> impossible for H to correctly predict that its correct and complete x86
>>>>>>>> emulation of its input would never stop running unless H actually
>>>>>>>> performed a correct and complete emulation of its input.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The correct and complete emulation of Ha(Pa,Pa) doesn't exist,
>>>>>> Neither does the correct and complete emulation of Infinite_Loop()
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes it does. If you simulate Infinite_Loop(), it won't halt. But if you run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
>>>> When you run H0((u32)Infinite_Loop)
>>>> "it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts"
>>>> How long are you going to keep the head game up?
>>>
>>> That you don't understand what I'm saying doesn't make it a head game.
>>>
>> You reject Ha(Pa,Pa) on this basis
>> run Ha(Pa,Pa), it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it
>> aborts.
>> Yet accept P0(Infinite_Loop), on the same basis
>> it won't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts.
>> ∴ You are playing head games.
>
> What does P0 do? Does it abort? If so, then yes P0(Infinite_Loop) doesn't do a correct and complete simulation because it aborts, so it's invalid to predict what the correct and complete simulation of P0(Infinite_Loop) would do.
>
> On the other hand, UTM(Infinite_Loop) does do a correct and complete simulation, so it *is* valid to predict what it will do.
>

In other words you are not bright enough to see that it is very easy for
H0 to recognize an infinite loop would never halt in a finite number of
steps of simulation?

Are you saying that infinite loops too difficult to recognize?

void Infinite_Loop()
{ HERE: goto HERE;
}

int main()
{ Output("Input_Halts = ", H0((u32)Infinite_Loop));
}

_Infinite_Loop()
[00001102](01) 55 push ebp
[00001103](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00001105](02) ebfe jmp 00001105
[00001107](01) 5d pop ebp
[00001108](01) c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0007) [00001108]

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37880&group=comp.theory#37880

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:248a:b0:476:93ab:b35e with SMTP id gi10-20020a056214248a00b0047693abb35emr20445329qvb.60.1660711924099;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a0d:d4cd:0:b0:320:2a7a:53a3 with SMTP id
w196-20020a0dd4cd000000b003202a7a53a3mr19127491ywd.389.1660711923894; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 21:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 21:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<tEmdnfEhQrIvM2T_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <sqqKK.137501$Me2.29783@fx47.iad>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com> <Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com> <A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad> <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (dklei...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:52:04 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2408
 by: dklei...@gmail.com - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:52 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:21:04 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>
> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P)
> of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>
H is , by definition, a Turing Machine and therefore halts.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<b_Kcnf8WbMNH6WH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37881&group=comp.theory#37881

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:55:54 +0000
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 23:56:17 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <b_Kcnf8WbMNH6WH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 21
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-tVgYuGtIW0gl/25dmoNz3MZpHGrcZxapIsLZm9K9gRpxFfD3rhpffg0eMl8LWe7j7SftcA8wJia5DtB!6Tp36o6XahpGdtSQuYyY7WayfVLjuUxrtfOMUzUJH0b/5y/mn4SpMkbt5RFI7kltuIFsmoTW3ac=
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-Received-Bytes: 3060
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 04:56 UTC

On 8/16/2022 11:52 PM, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:21:04 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>>
>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P)
>> of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>
> H is , by definition, a Turing Machine and therefore halts.

H is a C function that I hope to show is a valid proxy for TM at some
future date, after it is accepted that H(P,P)==0 is correct software
engineering.

I am biding my time here while I am preparing the code for a much wider
audience.

--
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: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<fcd6e828-f966-4731-8061-5665a22f970fn@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37882&group=comp.theory#37882

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:11c8:b0:343:4d55:3307 with SMTP id n8-20020a05622a11c800b003434d553307mr21510036qtk.306.1660712549292;
Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:02:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:7242:0:b0:67c:3179:c678 with SMTP id
n63-20020a257242000000b0067c3179c678mr18047132ybc.345.1660712548984; Tue, 16
Aug 2022 22:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 22:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b_Kcnf8WbMNH6WH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.208.151.23; posting-account=7Xc2EwkAAABXMcQfERYamr3b-64IkBws
NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.208.151.23
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<T9GdncITtZzow2f_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <d2AKK.1016233$X_i.4836@fx18.iad>
<t5idnUq6Z-PBRWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com> <r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com> <JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> <tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com> <Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com> <A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad> <s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com> <b_Kcnf8WbMNH6WH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <fcd6e828-f966-4731-8061-5665a22f970fn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
From: dkleine...@gmail.com (dklei...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:02:29 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2895
 by: dklei...@gmail.com - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:02 UTC

On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 9:56:23 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
> On 8/16/2022 11:52 PM, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:21:04 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
> >>
> >> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P)
> >> of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
> >>
> > H is , by definition, a Turing Machine and therefore halts.
> H is a C function that I hope to show is a valid proxy for TM at some
> future date, after it is accepted that H(P,P)==0 is correct software
> engineering.
>
> I am biding my time here while I am preparing the code for a much wider
> audience.
>
H the C program is assumed equivalent to H the Turing Machine.

Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM said about my work [competence?]

<nLOdnZYR-unTHmH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=37886&group=comp.theory#37886

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:57:34 +0000
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 00:57:57 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.12.0
Subject: Re: Here is what a computer scientist that has been published in CACM
said about my work [competence?]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <VUmdneqWu_jdjGT_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<3BBKK.730686$5fVf.367715@fx09.iad>
<Vp6dnZdlCtCndWf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<82CKK.917261$JVi.344055@fx17.iad>
<V86dnTZgD6Bacmf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<IGCKK.131460$dh2.119930@fx46.iad>
<rf6dne7Bna80ZGf_nZ2dnZfqlJzNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<r9DKK.750232$ntj.655539@fx15.iad>
<LX-dnT2cwJELnmb_nZ2dnZfqlJ9g4p2d@giganews.com>
<JCDKK.772034$ssF.405468@fx14.iad>
<19WdnXfCmdUglWb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<tZKKK.773109$ssF.431398@fx14.iad>
<3e1e8c27-ec66-4eae-89b0-bd144bb1cd1bn@googlegroups.com>
<Z7mdndrO-6onPGb_nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com>
<f64d20e6-86f3-4f50-a643-e4b6d7fe2ca5n@googlegroups.com>
<A46dnW7Luri5NGb_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<eeXKK.159378$%i2.92635@fx48.iad>
<s0-dnfITQe3_32H_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6b3ad507-9de4-4a18-b63d-ad8c0e163ed9n@googlegroups.com>
<b_Kcnf8WbMNH6WH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<fcd6e828-f966-4731-8061-5665a22f970fn@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <fcd6e828-f966-4731-8061-5665a22f970fn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <nLOdnZYR-unTHmH_nZ2dnZfqlJ_NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 33
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-H2tzG1a1mPkGYqvIdrxnl8ScYmkPnWDDNMunEtyUO9VsC+XeGm0A6+86KymevBg83F6U+2AltWeCzw1!/iuoSM4p7kkrRjhgLWjlYrlBbBqDKt8Q8nDHlgoDfspswSWn+FZzN3i1dcLAp4LChvbcvvhMaYs=
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
 by: olcott - Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:57 UTC

On 8/17/2022 12:02 AM, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 9:56:23 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/16/2022 11:52 PM, dklei...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022 at 6:21:04 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So you are saying that the correct and complete x86 emulation by H(P,P)
>>>> of its input WOULD STOP RUNNING?
>>>>
>>> H is , by definition, a Turing Machine and therefore halts.
>> H is a C function that I hope to show is a valid proxy for TM at some
>> future date, after it is accepted that H(P,P)==0 is correct software
>> engineering.
>>
>> I am biding my time here while I am preparing the code for a much wider
>> audience.
>>
> H the C program is assumed equivalent to H the Turing Machine.

H is a C function, not a program and I made it as Turing equivalent as I
could. H always returns the same value for the same arguments every time
that it is invoked.

The computer scientist seemed to think (this may be a bad paraphrase)
that H must return the same value for the same arguments EVEN IF H IS
NOT INVOKED.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Pages:12345678910
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor