Groups > comp.theory > #51984

Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ]

Subject	Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ]
Newsgroups	comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
References	(16 earlier) <t7jhfn$kfc$1@dont-email.me> <t7jmvi$1ukh$1@gioia.aioe.org> <j_idnQ4uqvj8_wD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <tvdnK.53503$X_i.15539@fx18.iad> <CZWdnQh_NLwe9QD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From	Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID	<e_dnK.35922$kaDc.28131@fx46.iad> (permalink)
Organization	Forte - www.forteinc.com
Date	2022-06-05 22:52 -0400

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/5/22 10:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/5/2022 9:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/5/22 10:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/5/2022 8:58 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>> On 06/06/2022 01:24, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>>>>> On 6/5/2022 5:59 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>> <..snip..>>>
>>>>>> Sure.
>>>>>> The question right now is what you would call a TM which evaluates 
>>>>>> the first 10 steps of a computation, and then does something else. 
>>>>>> What is it doing while evaluating those 10 steps?
>>>>>
>>>>> What would I call it? POOP! It just goes to show the accuracy and 
>>>>> flexibility of Ben's acronym for any Peter-related concept.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But PO didn't invent the concept of (partially) simulating a 
>>>> computation in order to compute certain properties of that 
>>>> computation!  It's been around since Turing's days, and is very useful.
>>>>
>>>> Mike.
>>>
>>> That is true. I am apparently the first one that ever thought this 
>>> through well enough so that machine descriptions matching the 
>>> following pattern could be correctly determined to be non-halting:
>>>
>>>       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
>>>
>>> In that a partial simulation does correctly predict the behavior of a 
>>> complete simulation it can be used to recognize infinite behavior 
>>> patterns.
>>>
>>
>> Except that it doesn't since P(P) Halts if H(P,P) returns 0, which, by 
>> the DEFINITION of the requirements of the Halting Problem, H(P,P) 
>> needs to accept (return 1) if P(P) Halts, 
> This seems to be brand new computer science that I just discovered.
> 
> Previously no one understood that it was possible for the correct 
> simulation of the input to H(P,P) to be computationally distinct (thus 
> not equivalent) to the direct execution of P(P).

By what definition of "Correct" are you using?

That is like says I can be correct at saying 1+2 = 4 if I just redefine 
1+2 to be 4.

Note, if you correct deviates IN ANY WAY, from the UTM definition, you 
can't use it in your definiton of the Halting Problem.

> 
> Because of this all of the computer science textbooks refer to the 
> halting behavior of P(P) as what must be decided by the halt decider.

Because that IS what must be decided by the Halt Decider.

> 
> This same computer science also knows that a decider must compute the 
> mapping of its input finite string to an accept or reject state on the 
> basis of a property of this input encoded in this finite string.

Right, and the property is the Halting status of UTM(P,P).

That is a FULLY DEFINED property.

> 
> THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ALWAYS WORKS
> H computes the mapping from its input finite strings to its accept or 
> reject state on the basis of the actual behavior specified by the actual 
> input as measured by the correct UTM simulation of this input by H.

Right, UTM simulation, and UTM simulation of its input is DEFINED to 
match the behavior of the machine its input represents.

Thus BY DEFINITON UTM(<M>, w) matches the behavior of M(w). It isn't 
"computationall distinct" as you tried to claim above.

So UTM(P,P) matches P(P), and you answer is proved incorrect, since P(P) 
Halts if H(P,P) returns 0, and thus UTM(P,P) will halt, and thus H(P,P) 
needed to accept (return 1), which it didn't so it is wrong.

> 
> It has been completely proven that partial simulations do correctly 
> predict the behavior of some complete simulations.
> 

yes, SOME, but not this one.

FALLICY of proof by example.

1st grade error.

Thread

Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-03 17:17 -0500
  Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-03 18:50 -0400
  Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-06-04 00:35 +0100
    Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-03 18:56 -0500
      Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-03 20:20 -0400
        Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-03 22:51 -0500
          Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 03:01 -0700
            Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 10:11 -0500
              Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 11:38 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 10:51 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 12:11 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 11:25 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 13:15 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 12:23 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 14:09 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 13:14 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 14:31 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 13:39 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ BRAIN DEAD MORON ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 14:49 -0400
              Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-04 18:17 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Alan Mackenzie ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 13:37 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Alan Mackenzie ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 14:54 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Alan Mackenzie ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 14:01 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Alan Mackenzie ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 15:57 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Alan Mackenzie ] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-04 19:02 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 14:28 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 16:05 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] [OT] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-06-04 17:30 -0600
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-06-05 13:14 +0300
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 05:34 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 11:12 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 06:21 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 07:58 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 14:47 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2022-06-05 16:28 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 16:34 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 15:44 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 16:49 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:22 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:28 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:35 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:50 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:56 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 12:01 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:19 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:27 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 12:58 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:13 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:14 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 17:46 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 13:05 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:22 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:26 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:17 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:17 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:30 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:33 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:47 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:56 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 16:09 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 21:23 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 16:32 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-06-06 16:10 +0300
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-06 17:47 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2022-06-05 18:44 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:48 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:29 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:53 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 16:34 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:38 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:41 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:42 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:54 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:58 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 13:07 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:23 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:20 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 17:04 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:17 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:37 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:57 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 18:17 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 18:07 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:19 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:32 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:34 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:49 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 19:42 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-06-06 16:03 +0300
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:24 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:18 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:38 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 20:44 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:54 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-06-05 18:56 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) [ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 13:07 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) [ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:29 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 12:14 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-06-05 13:38 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-06-05 16:17 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 10:59 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:29 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 10:57 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:31 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:39 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:59 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 12:02 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:31 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 13:35 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 14:54 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 13:57 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 14:09 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:25 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 14:33 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 15:43 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:24 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-06-05 15:46 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2022-06-05 15:16 +0000
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:10 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-06-05 21:07 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 15:15 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 21:28 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 15:36 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 16:44 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 16:38 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 15:41 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 16:57 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-06-05 15:59 -0600
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-06-06 00:59 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-06-05 18:24 -0600
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-06-06 01:40 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-06-05 18:44 -0600
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 20:03 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 21:59 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 21:14 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 22:44 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2022-06-06 02:58 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 21:11 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 22:20 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 21:37 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 22:52 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 22:03 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ brand new computer science ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 23:26 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ Ordinary software engineering ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 22:41 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ Ordinary software engineering ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-06 00:17 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ Ordinary software engineering ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-06 10:28 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers[ Ordinary software engineering ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-06 21:04 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 22:15 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 21:22 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 22:38 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Mike Terry ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 19:27 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Mike Terry ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 20:56 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ members of c/c++ ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-07 20:04 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ members of c/c++ ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-07 22:45 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Mike Terry ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-06 17:49 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Mike Terry ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-06 11:59 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:07 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-06-05 17:12 +0100
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-05 11:15 -0500
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:45 -0400
                Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-05 12:41 -0400
          Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 06:27 -0400
            Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-06-04 10:28 -0500
              Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers)[ Andy Walker ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-06-04 11:51 -0400
  Re: Refuting the HP proofs (adapted for software engineers) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc.corp> - 2022-06-04 00:36 +0100

csiph-web