Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.theory > #139508

Re: is the ct-thesis cooked?

Subject Re: is the ct-thesis cooked?
Newsgroups comp.theory
References (25 earlier) <dPddR.598534$VY9.572054@fx10.iad> <10l3u2i$1a2so$2@dont-email.me> <v9tdR.98059$4e1.22923@fx20.iad> <10l60j2$1s352$3@dont-email.me> <10l7dui$2crtl$1@dont-email.me>
From Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID <8sMdR.366381$eaX5.91000@fx14.iad> (permalink)
Organization Forte - www.forteinc.com
Date 2026-01-26 11:17 -0500

Show all headers | View raw

On 1/26/26 4:59 AM, dart200 wrote:
> On 1/25/26 1:05 PM, dart200 wrote:
>> On 1/25/26 10:20 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 1/24/26 9:10 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>> On 1/24/26 4:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 1/24/26 5:31 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/24/26 2:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 3:56 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 11:52 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 1:33 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 9:26 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 11:45 AM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 4:17 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 3:03 AM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/23/26 5:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/20/26 9:30 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/20/26 4:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The term *IS* defined, and to change it means you lie.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doubling down on definist fallacy ehh???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess you don't understand the difinist fallacy, as 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using the ACTUAL definition isn't a fallacy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nah ur just pushing a definition that u've happened latch 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> onto because it's convenient for u
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> classic definist fallacy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, you are just stuck in a definist fallacy about what a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> definist fallacy is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems you don't understand the concept that some things 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ARE just defined a given way to be in a given context.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> and u richard are not the god what that is
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But "the field" is, and thus you are just saying it is ok to 
>>>>>>>>>>> change the meaning of words.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i don't believe u represent what "the field" is either
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The go to "the field" and see if they disagree.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "the field" can come here if they like,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but as it stands i'm going to call out any more "nOT mUh 
>>>>>>>> CoMpUTaTiOn" arguments as definist fallacy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In other words, you are just admitting, you don't care what the 
>>>>>>> words mean in the field, you will just continue to be a stupid 
>>>>>>> and ignorant lair about what you are doing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i just don't care what YOU, richard, says "CoMpUTaTiOn" means. you 
>>>>>> aren't "the field" bro, and i just really dgaf about ur endless 
>>>>>> definist fallacy
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But apperently you do, as you aren't just going to present your 
>>>>> ideas directly to "the field" on a peer-reviewed journal, so 
>>>>> something is telling you that you have something to fix.
>>>>
>>>> or rather the peer-review is so gatekept i don't even get a review 
>>>> back for my submission, just rejection without review.
>>>>
>>>> the system is broken such that i will take my stance elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>> everyone else can ignore me at all our peril...
>>>>
>>>
>>> WHich just shows that you aren't in step with what theory actually is 
>>> talking about.
>>>
>>> That is your problem, you assume the world is wrong, and more than 
>>> likely it is you that is wrong.
>>
>> i'm not one continually asserting a bunch of impossible to find 
>> teapots floating around in machine space
> 
> by "teapots" i mean unidentifiably undecidable machine ghosts that 
> apparently are all non-halting,
> 
> and by "machine space" i mean the full enumeration of turing machines
> 
> just to be clear, eh???

Right, so what was wrong with my proof?

They have to be non-halting, as halting is always provable just by 
running the machine long enough.

They have to be non-identifiable, as since they must be non-halting, to 
identify them as undecidable would become proof of there non-halting.

And, they have to exists, or otherwise we could build a decider by your 
method of iterating through all partial deciders, but then we can build 
the pathological machine for THAT decider, and it must not be able to 
answer.

> 
>>
>>>
>>> If you want to break down a "broken" structure, you need to know 
>>> enough about it to SHOW it is broken.
>>>
>>> Just assuming it is just shows that it is most likely YOU that is wrong.
>>>
>>> It is more that the system ignores that which tries to break it, 
>>> because getting side tracked on false trails is too damaging.
>>>
>>> To me it seems more of a peril to accept your misguided ideas.
>>>
>>> The fact that you begin by trying to redefine things out of ignorance 
>>> doesn't help your case.
>>
>>
> 
>

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-12 20:21 -0800
  Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-13 07:09 -0500
    Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-13 12:33 -0800
      Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2026-01-14 02:41 +0000
        Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-13 19:38 -0800
      Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-14 22:43 -0500
        Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-15 04:23 -0800
          Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-15 22:28 -0500
            Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-16 01:08 -0800
              Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-16 11:46 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-16 14:21 -0800
                The essence of all Computation generically defined olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-16 16:58 -0600
                Re: The essence of all Computation generically defined Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-16 18:21 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-16 18:21 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-16 16:43 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-16 22:24 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-16 23:23 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 07:33 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-17 18:22 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 15:31 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-17 22:33 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 19:14 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 17:24 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 20:35 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 04:44 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 22:37 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 06:45 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 10:24 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 15:55 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 13:38 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 19:28 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 21:11 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 00:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-19 23:55 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 07:59 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-20 18:30 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-23 20:36 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 00:03 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 07:17 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 08:45 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 12:26 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 10:33 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 14:52 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 12:56 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 17:25 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 14:31 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 19:52 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 18:10 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 13:20 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:05 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 16:14 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:28 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 15:50 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 21:48 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-27 13:59 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-27 18:31 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-01-28 07:34 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-28 10:33 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-02-01 07:33 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-02 10:11 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-02 18:44 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-02 23:53 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-03 07:20 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-03 11:33 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-03 21:33 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-04 07:30 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-04 21:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-04 18:41 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-05 07:13 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-05 10:05 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-05 19:40 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-05 18:47 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-06 09:50 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-06 10:23 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-06 18:18 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-02-06 16:17 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-02-06 19:26 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 01:59 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 11:17 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-24 13:42 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 14:20 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-25 13:04 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:09 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-25 13:10 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:11 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-28 12:43 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-28 13:16 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-28 13:26 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-28 13:44 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-02-01 07:33 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 06:37 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 16:42 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 20:17 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 18:40 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 22:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 22:12 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 07:03 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 15:08 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 12:55 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 10:44 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 15:56 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 23:09 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 00:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-19 22:46 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 07:59 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-20 17:36 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-23 20:52 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 14:29 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 19:52 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 19:30 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 13:20 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:08 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 17:24 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 20:01 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 11:21 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 11:43 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 19:14 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 22:28 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 22:05 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 07:05 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 10:15 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 15:56 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 13:50 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 22:27 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 15:01 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 19:28 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 20:30 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 00:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 22:28 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 19:28 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 20:51 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 00:29 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-19 22:18 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 07:59 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-20 17:55 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 20:07 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 09:44 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 14:36 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-24 19:52 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-24 18:24 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 13:21 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 13:05 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-25 17:36 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-25 21:56 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 11:39 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 11:43 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-26 17:17 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-26 14:29 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Dude <punditster@gmail.com> - 2026-01-27 13:31 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-28 01:12 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Dude <punditster@gmail.com> - 2026-01-28 13:29 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-28 13:37 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-01-27 14:07 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-01-28 07:23 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 19:57 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 22:21 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-17 12:17 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 08:15 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-17 18:27 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 15:31 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 09:47 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 15:31 -0500
                The essence of all Computation generically defined olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-16 18:35 -0600
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2026-01-17 01:28 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 10:52 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-17 22:45 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 17:20 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 20:30 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 18:23 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-17 22:47 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 00:28 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 07:28 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 10:10 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-18 15:56 -0500
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-18 14:55 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 11:03 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 10:59 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2026-01-18 02:49 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-01-17 19:15 -0800
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-18 11:12 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2026-01-20 00:50 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 20:10 +0000
                Re: is the ct-thesis cooked? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2026-01-23 01:40 +0000

csiph-web