Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Olcott's theory |
| Date | 2021-07-11 18:20 +0100 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <scf991$1vva$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <1c-dnetOgJPflnf9nZ2dnUU7-fHNnZ2d@giganews.com> <scd816$1htm$1@gioia.aioe.org> <S82dnaVZZM8JsHf9nZ2dnUU7-SednZ2d@giganews.com> <scenld$mic$1@gioia.aioe.org> <2Kednc_9FJoglHb9nZ2dnUU7-VXNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
olcott wrote:
> On 7/11/2021 7:19 AM, Peter wrote:
>> olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/10/2021 5:47 PM, Peter wrote:
>>>> olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/10/2021 2:30 PM, Peter wrote:
>>>>>> olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/10/2021 12:12 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 10 Jul 2021 12:08:02 -0500
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Halting Problem can only exist because
>>>>>>>>> of this same sort of pathological self-reference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ^ that is your mistake: the halting problem still exists even if a
>>>>>>>> collection of proofs have a mistake.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does [Turing 1937] rely on a decider being part of that which is
>>>>>>>> being decided? Wikipedia suggests not:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Turing's proof departs from calculation by recursive functions and
>>>>>>>> introduces the notion of computation by machine."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *I agree that I have not solved the halting problem*
>>>>>>> At most I have only proved that the conventional proofs of the
>>>>>>> undecidability of the halting problem that rely on the Strachey
>>>>>>> form, are incorrect. This seems to include all textbook proofs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [An impossible program] C. Strachey
>>>>>>> The Computer Journal, Volume 7, Issue 4, January 1965, Page 313,
>>>>>>> https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/7.4.313
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now seems to be a good time to finally look at the Turing proof.
>>>>>>> https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Turing_Paper_1936.pdf
>>>>>>> I am not sure if the above linked copy has the later published
>>>>>>> correction.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the Turing proof is isomorphic to the Strachey form, I don't
>>>>>>> know what it left to prove that the halting problem is undecidable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is more than one proof. I was taught, not the the halting
>>>>>> problem for TMs is unsolvable, but that the halting problem for
>>>>>> register machines is unsolvable. The reason being, I suppose,
>>>>>> that the course was taught by one of the inventors of the register
>>>>>> machine. [There are a variety of register machines, this one had
>>>>>> an unlimited number of registers and the instructions
>>>>>
>>>>> All of the proofs seem to boil down to this one idea:
>>>>>
>>>>> An impossible program
>>>>> C. Strachey
>>>>> The Computer Journal, Volume 7, Issue 4, January 1965, Page 313,
>>>>> https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/7.4.313
>>>>
>>>> And you know that how? Have you read _all_ of the proofs?
>>>>
>>>
>>> All of the textbooks have this same proof.
>>
>> You haven't read all the textbooks, and there are proofs in papers and
>> lectures. The mention of Martin Davis downstream led me to his book
>> /Computability and unsolvability/, McGraw-Hill 1958 (also recent Dover
>> republication). He proves the unsolvability of the halting problem by
>> noting that (exists y)T(x,x,y) is uncomputable (T being Kleene's T
>> predicate). You seem not to know what you are talking about.
>>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleene%27s_T_predicate
>
> That Gödel numbering crap simply hides the pathological
> self-reference(Olcott 2004) error behind so much complexity that it
> can't be seen.
>
> When we ask what Boolean value can a halt decider return to an input
> that changes its behavior to contradict this value we cannot answer this
> question because it is an incorrect type mismatch error question. The
> answer is restricted to {true, false} thus excluding the correct answer
> of “neither” making the question itself incorrect. The TM / input pairs
> that “prove” the halting problem is undecidable have the same
> pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) error as the self-contradictory
> liar paradox.
>
> To eliminate this pathological feedback loop error we examine the
> behavior of the input with a pure simulator that has no effect
> what-so-ever on the behavior of the input. As correct science requires
> the dependent variable (the halt status decision) must only have the
> independent variable (the behavior of the input) and be isolated from
> all other influences. Only when we do it this way do we get the correct
> halt status decision for the input.
>
> Until the behavior of its input proves that it will never halt every H
> remains a pure simulator of this input. This single fact by itself
> proves that the behavior of H has no effect what-so-ever on its halt
> status decision. When H stops simulating its input the execution of the
> input has been suspended, this does not count as halting.
>
Why are you ignoring the Davis proof that I referred to?
--
The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here
Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 18:00 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 12:08 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 18:12 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 13:06 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 19:23 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 13:32 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 19:38 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 13:45 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 19:59 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 14:09 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 20:14 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 14:32 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 20:35 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 14:08 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 16:12 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 22:39 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 16:46 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 22:52 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 16:58 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 23:00 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 17:08 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory (Ben, Kaz or Mike please talk to Flibble) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 15:12 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-10 20:30 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 16:04 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-10 23:47 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 18:30 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 02:56 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 19:18 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 03:34 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 19:45 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 10:34 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 16:55 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 21:25 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 10:32 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-10 22:39 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 10:23 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-11 10:43 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-11 13:19 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 10:09 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-11 18:20 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble agrees that I am correct ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 12:45 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble agrees that I am correct ] Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-11 19:18 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble agrees that I am correct ] Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-19 20:09 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble agrees that I am correct ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 08:44 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 14:35 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-12 13:36 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 08:56 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-12 16:04 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 10:27 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-13 21:18 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-19 20:01 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 08:41 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 09:12 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-20 17:16 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 14:41 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-21 06:55 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 09:40 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-21 16:49 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 11:00 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-22 08:44 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-10 22:32 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-11 13:22 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-12 14:13 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 06:19 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 09:25 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-07-12 17:33 +0200
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 16:51 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-12 21:27 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 09:36 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-13 19:15 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 17:16 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 22:56 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 10:01 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 22:03 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 10:05 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-16 23:07 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 22:45 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 09:56 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 21:48 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 03:43 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-15 07:54 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 09:35 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-16 23:09 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] ( isomorphic thus correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 09:24 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-12 13:27 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-07-12 21:08 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-12 21:24 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 16:53 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-07-12 22:59 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 17:23 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-12 21:32 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 23:31 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 03:51 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 09:00 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 07:38 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 10:01 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 08:23 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 10:35 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 09:13 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 15:24 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 17:53 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 16:22 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 18:48 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 17:06 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 19:17 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] (Fixing Tarski's nonsense ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 19:29 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 18:14 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 20:40 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 18:58 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 21:08 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 19:52 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 22:39 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 21:00 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 23:17 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble quote agrees] ( incorrect questions ) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 21:41 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 07:23 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-13 00:00 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-12 23:40 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 18:23 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-12 22:57 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 17:21 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-13 11:49 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 08:49 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-07-13 00:45 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 21:10 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 17:03 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-12 16:52 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-07-13 00:37 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 22:02 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 17:00 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 09:25 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 23:04 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [unknown to be undecidable] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 09:21 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 07:52 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 11:42 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 11:52 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 16:52 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 04:39 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ "I agree with Olcott" ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 11:04 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-11 22:14 -0600
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 09:10 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 16:09 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 16:14 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 08:23 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 07:24 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 09:59 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 22:07 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 20:17 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 08:45 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands this ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 16:40 -0700
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands pathological self reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-19 14:33 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands pathological self reference(Olcott 2004) ] Peter <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2021-07-19 20:40 +0100
Re: Olcott's theory [ Flibble understands pathological self reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 08:52 -0500
Re: Olcott's theory "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-19 13:25 -0700
csiph-web