Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #85250

Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it)

From Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c, comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it)
Message-ID <20220715170340.00001838@reddwarf.jmc.corp> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <esudnY0OB8EN6kz_nZ2dnUU7_81j4p2d@giganews.com> <20220715153211.00005430@reddwarf.jmc.corp> <JeidnSoS1rskH0z_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <20220715164900.00006bca@reddwarf.jmc.corp> <N7ednc5HcpwLE0z_nZ2dnUU7_81j4p2d@giganews.com>
Organization Jupiter Mining Corporation
Date 2022-07-15 17:03 +0100

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 10:58:14 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 7/15/2022 10:49 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 10:07:36 -0500
> > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 7/15/2022 9:32 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 09:19:59 -0500
> >>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>      
> >>>> On 7/15/2022 7:06 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 01:46:23 -0500
> >>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>         
> >>>>>> On 7/15/2022 1:23 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 17:41:06 -0500
> >>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>            
> >>>>>>>> On 7/14/2022 5:30 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 16:02:35 -0500
> >>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>               
> >>>>>>>>>> On 7/14/2022 3:22 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 15:02:21 -0500
> >>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>                  
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/14/2022 2:28 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:  
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 14:19:38 -0500
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>                     
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is an explanation of a key new insight into the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting problem provided in the language of software
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineering. Technical computer science terms are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> explained using software engineering terms. No
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge of the halting problem is required.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is based on fully operational software executed in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the x86utm operating system. The x86utm operating
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> system (based on an excellent open source x86
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulator) was created to study the details of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting problem proof counter-examples at the much
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher level of abstraction of C/x86.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> int H(ptr p, ptr i); // simulating halt decider
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> void P(ptr x)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>           int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>           if (Halt_Status)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>             HERE: goto HERE;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>           return;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>           Output("Input_Halts = ", H(P, P));
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When simulating halt decider H(P,P) simulates its input
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can see that: (1) Function H() is called from P().
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2) With the same arguments to H().
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (3) With no instructions in P preceding its invocation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of H(P,P).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The above shows that the simulated P cannot possibly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> terminate normally. Because H can see the same
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (1)(2)(3) that we see H aborts its simulation of P and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rejects P as non-halting.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>              In computability theory, the halting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem is the problem of determining, from a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> description of an arbitrary computer program and an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> input, whether the program will finish running, or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> continue to run forever. Alan Turing proved in 1936
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that a general algorithm to solve the halting problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for all possible program- input pairs cannot exist.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>              For any program H that might determine if
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> programs halt, a "pathological" program P, called with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> some input, can pass its own source and its input to H
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and then specifically do the opposite of what H
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> predicts P will do. No H can exist that handles this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> H and P implement the exact pathological relationship
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to each other as described above. Because H(P,P) does
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> handle this case the above halting problem undecidable
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> input template has been refuted.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *When this halt deciding principle understood to be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct* A halt decider must compute the mapping from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> its inputs to an accept or reject state on the basis
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the actual behavior that is actually specified by
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> these inputs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Then (by logical necessity) this implements that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> principle* Every simulating halt decider that correctly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulates its input until it correctly predicts that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this simulated input would never terminate normally,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly rejects this input as non-halting.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *H is a Pure function*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> thus implements a *Computable function*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thus H is Turing computable.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> software engineering*
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361701808_Halting_problem_proofs_refuted_on_the_basis_of_software_engineering
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>                    
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You forgot to mention infinite recursion which I suppose
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> is progress.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>                     
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have proved that H(P,P) == 0 is correct.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have shown that H/P does implement the HP's "impossible
> >>>>>>>>>>>> input" template.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore I have refuted all of the halting problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>> proofs that rely on this template.  
> >>>>>>>>>>>        
> >>>>>>>>>>> Equating pathological input with non-halting is erroneous:
> >>>>>>>>>>> you are only doing that because your broken solution
> >>>>>>>>>>> treats it as "infinite recursion".  There is no recursion
> >>>>>>>>>>> in [Strachey 1965] and the HP proofs based on it.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>>>>>                  
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There is no recursion in any of the conventional proofs
> >>>>>>>>>> only because no one ever previously bothered to fully
> >>>>>>>>>> examine how a simulating halt decider would address these
> >>>>>>>>>> otherwise "impossible" inputs.  
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have shown that a simulating halt decider needn't be
> >>>>>>>>> recursive in nature:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/i42output/halting-problem/blob/main/README.txt
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>>>               
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You sure do make it easy to review your work.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>        "When the simulator detects the call to H in P it
> >>>>>>>> forks the simulation into a non-halting branch"
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is an infinite set of cases where this overly
> >>>>>>>> simplistic criteria gets the wrong answer.  
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> That is neither an honest review or any kind of rebuttal: I
> >>>>>>> have told you before: assertions made without evidence can be
> >>>>>>> dismissed without evidence.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If you claim there are an infinite number of cases where it
> >>>>>>> gets the wrong answer then it shouldn't be too hard for to
> >>>>>>> provide ONE case backing up your claim.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>>>            
> >>>>>> Sure:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> void P(ptr x)
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>> static int count = 3;
> >>>>>>       count--;
> >>>>>>       if (!count) goto exit;
> >>>>>>       int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> >>>>>>       if (Halt_Status)
> >>>>>>         HERE: goto HERE;
> >>>>>> exit:
> >>>>>>       return;
> >>>>>> }
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> int main()
> >>>>>> {
> >>>>>>       Output("Input_Halts = ", H(P, P));
> >>>>>> }  
> >>>>>     
> >>>>> Nope; you seem to have forgotten that my decider is not
> >>>>> recursive in nature: my decider will correctly determine that
> >>>>> that input is pathological so will signal an exception.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> /Flibble
> >>>>>
> >>>>>         
> >>>>
> >>>> The above terminates normally so your decider gets the wrong
> >>>> answer.  
> >>>    
> >>> It is a pathological input so neither halts nor doesn't halt:
> >>> pathological input is INVALID so the correct "answer" is to signal
> >>> an exception.
> >>>
> >>> /Flibble
> >>>      
> >>
> >> So you don't know how static variables work?
> >> I am not surprised.
> >>
> >>
> >> void P(ptr x)
> >> {
> >> static int count = 0;
> >>     if (count++ >= 2) goto exit;
> >>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> >>     if (Halt_Status)
> >>       HERE: goto HERE;
> >> exit:
> >>     return;
> >> }
> >>
> >> int main()
> >> {
> >>     Output("Input_Halts = ", H(P,P));
> >> }
> >>
> >> _Pm()
> >> [0000141e](01)  55           push ebp
> >> [0000141f](02)  8bec         mov ebp,esp
> >> [00001421](03)  83ec08       sub esp,+08
> >> [00001424](05)  a100000000   mov eax,[00000000]
> >> [00001429](03)  8945fc       mov [ebp-04],eax
> >> [0000142c](06)  8b0d00000000 mov ecx,[00000000]
> >> [00001432](03)  83c101       add ecx,+01
> >> [00001435](06)  890d00000000 mov [00000000],ecx
> >> [0000143b](04)  837dfc02     cmp dword [ebp-04],+02
> >> [0000143f](02)  7c02         jl 00001443
> >> [00001441](02)  eb1b         jmp 0000145e
> >> [00001443](03)  8b5508       mov edx,[ebp+08]
> >> [00001446](01)  52           push edx
> >> [00001447](03)  8b4508       mov eax,[ebp+08]
> >> [0000144a](01)  50           push eax
> >> [0000144b](05)  e8defcffff   call 0000112e
> >> [00001450](03)  83c408       add esp,+08
> >> [00001453](03)  8945f8       mov [ebp-08],eax
> >> [00001456](04)  837df800     cmp dword [ebp-08],+00
> >> [0000145a](02)  7402         jz 0000145e
> >> [0000145c](02)  ebfe         jmp 0000145c
> >> [0000145e](02)  8be5         mov esp,ebp
> >> [00001460](01)  5d           pop ebp
> >> [00001461](01)  c3           ret
> >> Size in bytes:(0068) [00001461]
> >>
> >> _main()
> >> [0000146e](01)  55           push ebp
> >> [0000146f](02)  8bec         mov ebp,esp
> >> [00001471](05)  681e140000   push 0000141e
> >> [00001476](05)  681e140000   push 0000141e
> >> [0000147b](05)  e8aefcffff   call 0000112e
> >> [00001480](03)  83c408       add esp,+08
> >> [00001483](01)  50           push eax
> >> [00001484](05)  685f050000   push 0000055f
> >> [00001489](05)  e820f1ffff   call 000005ae
> >> [0000148e](03)  83c408       add esp,+08
> >> [00001491](02)  33c0         xor eax,eax
> >> [00001493](01)  5d           pop ebp
> >> [00001494](01)  c3           ret
> >> Size in bytes:(0039) [00001494]
> >>
> >>    machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
> >>    address   address   data      code       language
> >>    ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> >> [0000146e][00102462][00000000] 55           push ebp
> >> [0000146f][00102462][00000000] 8bec         mov ebp,esp
> >> [00001471][0010245e][0000141e] 681e140000   push 0000141e
> >> [00001476][0010245a][0000141e] 681e140000   push 0000141e
> >> [0000147b][00102456][00001480] e8aefcffff   call 0000112e
> >>
> >> H: Begin Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:11250e
> >> Address_of_H:112e
> >> [0000141e][001124fa][001124fe] 55           push ebp
> >> [0000141f][001124fa][001124fe] 8bec         mov ebp,esp
> >> [00001421][001124f2][90909090] 83ec08       sub esp,+08
> >> [00001424][001124f2][90909090] a100000000   mov eax,[00000000]
> >> [00001429][001124f2][90909090] 8945fc       mov [ebp-04],eax
> >> [0000142c][001124f2][90909090] 8b0d00000000 mov ecx,[00000000]
> >> [00001432][001124f2][90909090] 83c101       add ecx,+01
> >> [00001435][001124f2][90909090] 890d00000000 mov [00000000],ecx
> >> [0000143b][001124f2][90909090] 837dfc02     cmp dword [ebp-04],+02
> >> [0000143f][001124f2][90909090] 7c02         jl 00001443
> >> [00001441][001124f2][90909090] eb1b         jmp 0000145e
> >> [0000145e][001124fa][001124fe] 8be5         mov esp,ebp
> >> [00001460][001124fe][00001217] 5d           pop ebp
> >> [00001461][00112502][0000141e] c3           ret
> >> H: End Simulation   Input Terminated Normally
> >>
> >> [00001480][00102462][00000000] 83c408       add esp,+08
> >> [00001483][0010245e][00000001] 50           push eax
> >> [00001484][0010245a][0000055f] 685f050000   push 0000055f
> >> [00001489][0010245a][0000055f] e820f1ffff   call 000005ae
> >> Input_Halts = 1
> >> [0000148e][00102462][00000000] 83c408       add esp,+08
> >> [00001491][00102462][00000000] 33c0         xor eax,eax
> >> [00001493][00102466][00000018] 5d           pop ebp
> >> [00001494][0010246a][00000000] c3           ret
> >> Number of Instructions Executed(1317) == 20 Pages  
> > 
> > For this particular stack trace I notice that the function symbol at
> > the top of it is Pm not P which suggests to me one of two things:
> >   
> 
> I already had a P so I renamed it to Pm so it would not disturb my 
> existing code. When I changed all the Pm references to your name I 
> forgot one.

Then I suggest you check the output of compilation/linking is actually
initializing static variables correctly.  Are you even using a linker
or are you just executing an object file?  Static data normally goes
into a separate data segment during the linking process.

/Flibble

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 14:19 -0500
  Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-14 20:28 +0100
    Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 15:02 -0500
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-14 21:22 +0100
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:02 -0500
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-14 23:30 +0100
            Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 17:41 -0500
              Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 07:23 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 01:46 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 07:48 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 13:06 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 09:19 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 15:32 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 10:07 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 16:18 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 10:27 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 16:29 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 16:49 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 10:58 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 17:03 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 12:00 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 18:08 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 12:26 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 18:28 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 12:39 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 18:46 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 12:57 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 19:04 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 13:17 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 19:23 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 13:34 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 19:46 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 13:31 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 19:41 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 14:04 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 20:11 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering [ establishing my authorship and asserting my copyrights ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 14:28 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering [ establishing my authorship and asserting my copyrights ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 20:33 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering [ establishing my authorship and asserting my copyrights ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 19:32 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 12:20 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 20:23 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 12:26 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 20:27 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-07-15 19:37 +0000
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 12:39 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 20:41 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 12:53 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 15:03 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:06 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 15:16 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:23 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 21:26 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:36 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 21:39 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:44 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 21:49 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 14:08 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 22:10 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 14:14 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 22:20 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 14:27 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 22:29 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 14:36 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 22:39 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 15:03 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 23:05 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 15:43 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 23:47 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:01 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-16 00:08 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:18 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 18:12 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:22 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 18:44 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:51 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 18:59 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 17:08 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 20:59 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 20:24 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 23:17 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 22:50 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-16 06:47 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-16 10:15 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-16 11:41 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:34 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 18:54 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 16:58 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 19:07 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 17:17 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 19:44 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 17:50 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Big Dick <bigdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 22:42 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Big Dick <Big.Dick@olcott.crap> - 2022-07-15 21:22 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-07-15 19:49 +0100
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 19:38 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 18:56 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 21:05 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 20:36 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 21:47 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 20:57 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 22:12 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 21:27 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 22:39 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-16 00:15 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick23@gmail.com> - 2022-07-16 00:59 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-16 08:38 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-16 06:36 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-16 08:39 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-16 10:15 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-16 10:16 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-16 08:33 -0400
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-14 21:21 -0400
  Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 13:27 -0700
    Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 21:53 +0100
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:09 -0500
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 14:21 -0700
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:32 -0500
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-14 21:32 -0400
    Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:06 -0500
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 14:16 -0700
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:24 -0500
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 14:32 -0700
            Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:35 -0500
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 14:39 -0700
            Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:45 -0500
              Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 18:34 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 20:43 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 18:46 -0700
  Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 14:45 -0700
    Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 16:57 -0500
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 15:21 -0700
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 17:37 -0500
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 15:44 -0700
            Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 17:54 -0500
              Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:05 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:07 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:08 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 18:15 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:18 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:19 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 18:25 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 17:15 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2022-07-14 17:24 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 19:33 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-14 21:53 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 00:01 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-07-15 07:56 -0400
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 09:22 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 17:51 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 20:00 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 18:28 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 18:29 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2022-07-14 18:28 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 18:28 -0700
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-14 18:12 -0500
                Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-07-14 16:17 -0700
  Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 12:14 -0700
    Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 14:48 -0500
      Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:01 -0700
        Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-07-15 15:11 -0500
          Re: Halting problem proofs refuted on the basis of software engineering (Simplified so that most anyone here can validate it) Skep Dick <skepdick22@gmail.com> - 2022-07-15 13:19 -0700

csiph-web