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

Groups > comp.theory > #135944

Re: Genesis, POOH.

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 2025-11-17 at 07:08 +0800, wij wrote:
> There must be light, so the day comes.
> One day, olcott read the HP proof, he was very happy he can 'perceive' that
> the counter case is undecidable from the HP proof. But quickly, an eureka 
> moment sparked: 'I' can see it, it must be decidable... only genius can see
> hits a target no one else can see... 'I' must save human and the world... 
> jumped out the tub... genesis of POOH,... anyway.
> 
> All knowledge to olcott are essentially rhetoric problems (olcott does not know logic or
> 'semantics',
> so you can often see he explains: 'it is merely because
> my words are not precise enough...etc., 'I' knew it since xxx years ago. 
> 
> A perfect storm is owing to multiple coincidences. olcott estimated he had 50%
> wining chance, anyway, like throwing coin. After all, all are rhetoric issues 
> to olcott. All just need 'reviewers' to fix it.
> 
> For fear of plagiarism, copyright/name issues, olcott made patents, flooded
> the internet with the brilliant eureka moment... olcott, then, went to 
> everywhere he can publicly 'discuss' POOH (but disguised as plea of 'review').
> All are part of olcott's orchestrated plan.
> 
> ... To be continued.
> 
> P.S. I have no opinion discussion with olcott, because anyone can benefit from
>      it as it is on topic.

"I can see the HP is undecidable, so the HP is decidable. So, H(D)==0 is
correct." ... god says.

typedef int (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);

int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}

int main()
{
   HHH(DD);
}

This example is obvious to all CS people (yes, including olcott) that HHH(DD)
can never return as a decider.
The HP requires the halt decider H:
  1. H(D)==1 iff H(D) halts
  2. Of course, as a valid decider, there are more rules need not to mention
     to any CS people (OK, qualified CS people).
  
Human nature solves problems by ideology/desire, designate what the solution
must be, and then searching for the supporting proof. That is cheating.

olcott does not understand the logic 'if' and contradiction. So C,assembly,TM...
nearly all CS terms are 'sematicless' to olcott, but something 'the natural
meaning of the English language'.

The development of POOH has a long history. Originally, olcott does not even
know the halt decider itself has to return, 'halt' has no semantics in him
(e.g. it can be stop,terminate,abort,... position/time dependent,...whatever)

No one can track >20 years' detail. The long details has to skipped.
....
olcott managed (in the back, assembly level. As you may find, many are done
'in the back' and changing) to make the HHH(DD) in main to return and declared
 "See, the halting problem is refuted", POOH is the proof that no one can see.

------------
Well, will can move the mountain. Water drip can punch the rock.
With the faith, olcott continously tried to smash the stone with his head,
because the skull is harder than the stone, the cheek is thicker than the steel.

He might miss a factor, he needs to live longer than the life of the universe.
Thus, in the meanwile (of course), in the way to the promised Lake of Fire,
olcott, wearing the thron, carried the cross bearing with various received
insults,malicious attacks,hatred,smear... all the evil of human, in the hoped
way of harvest from the Great Plan, only to find there is second death.

But, he is god in the making, who knows.
The world is a feedback system, if it can be predicted, it may change.
To be continued.....

PS. Archeology is a hard task, contributions are welcome.

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

Thread

Genesis, POOH. wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 07:08 +0800
  Re: Genesis, POOH. wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-18 08:47 +0800

csiph-web