Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #129289 > unrolled thread
| Started by | dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-09-18 21:30 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-09-27 09:00 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 573 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.theory
on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-18 21:30 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-18 16:52 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-18 22:02 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-18 17:11 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 18:19 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 13:24 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 18:35 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 13:47 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 18:53 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 19:14 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 19:22 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 15:01 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 14:59 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-19 18:51 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 19:03 +0000
Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 14:57 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 20:14 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 20:16 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 15:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 20:41 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 20:46 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 20:57 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 22:55 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-20 17:48 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 17:04 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 05:09 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 20:25 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 15:31 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 20:32 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 15:38 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 20:48 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 16:58 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-19 22:11 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 17:30 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-19 22:35 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 18:07 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-20 00:24 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 19:38 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 21:09 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-20 02:26 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 20:40 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 21:47 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-20 03:03 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 21:26 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-20 07:49 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-20 04:40 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 23:49 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-09-20 09:55 +0200
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 07:40 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-20 17:01 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 12:08 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-20 20:40 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 22:59 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 06:50 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-20 07:19 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 07:22 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-20 13:02 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 08:10 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 23:00 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 18:11 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-20 01:08 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 02:12 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 21:39 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 03:00 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 22:21 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 05:02 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 06:52 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 15:51 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 10:56 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 22:04 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 22:10 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 17:34 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 23:03 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 18:07 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 23:25 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 18:40 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 03:17 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 23:02 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 06:16 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 22:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 03:24 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-20 23:04 -0500
Olcott meets Buddha Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 05:56 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 06:28 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 05:35 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-20 21:54 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 06:21 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 05:29 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 07:06 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 07:16 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 09:19 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 08:42 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 10:24 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-21 09:49 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 11:53 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Correctness Defined !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 09:02 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 14:57 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 10:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-21 09:17 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 10:20 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 15:39 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 09:27 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-21 17:12 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 10:27 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-21 17:53 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 17:47 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-22 02:04 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 20:51 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 21:17 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 21:54 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 18:52 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 17:33 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-22 01:59 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 21:52 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-22 05:31 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-21 23:32 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 08:05 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 00:20 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 09:14 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 01:41 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 10:09 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 02:32 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 11:52 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 09:23 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 18:49 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 10:51 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 19:11 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 11:20 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 19:54 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 12:20 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 20:13 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 21:16 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 09:22 +0800
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 07:15 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 12:55 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 11:08 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 13:56 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 19:10 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 12:18 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 12:32 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 19:37 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 13:08 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 21:22 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-24 01:00 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 19:15 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 19:53 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2025-09-24 01:16 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 19:05 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 21:08 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 06:35 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 23:59 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 07:11 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-24 18:18 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 03:11 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:26 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 19:26 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 13:31 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-22 20:10 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 18:17 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 07:00 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 10:02 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 16:29 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 10:35 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 17:08 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 11:29 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 18:18 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 12:35 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 18:46 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-09-23 17:21 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:17 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-23 10:03 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 10:07 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 16:36 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:18 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 15:12 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 14:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 19:45 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-09-21 09:36 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 11:33 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-21 06:33 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-21 07:54 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 21:34 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 21:10 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-21 23:20 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 16:40 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-22 04:57 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 16:16 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 14:19 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 16:44 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 14:53 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 17:04 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 16:46 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 08:04 +0800
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 18:50 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 21:12 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 23:29 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 21:34 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 23:42 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-22 21:53 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 09:16 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 10:24 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 12:43 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 11:07 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 13:22 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:30 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-23 21:51 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 11:34 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 13:49 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 12:07 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:24 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 12:29 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:45 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 12:52 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 15:03 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 13:10 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 15:15 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 13:40 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 19:31 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 19:33 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 19:57 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 20:49 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 21:06 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 21:09 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:03 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:05 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:18 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:06 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 20:19 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 20:51 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:04 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:14 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:15 -0700
church-turing thesis debunked dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:21 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:22 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:40 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:51 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 23:23 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 12:42 -0700
Re: church-turing thesis debunked --- LLM system review olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:30 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 21:02 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 23:08 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 21:25 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 23:49 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:04 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 00:09 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-23 22:18 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:20 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:10 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-24 09:24 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:16 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:04 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 14:44 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:07 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 22:12 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 06:42 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:45 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 17:10 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 13:33 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:00 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:14 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:41 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:39 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:49 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:33 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:38 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:57 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- BAD FAITH Dishonest Dialogue olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:09 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 15:19 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-09-23 21:28 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 21:51 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 18:17 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 06:43 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:51 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-24 13:57 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 09:41 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:49 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 09:54 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 16:11 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 10:24 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 16:27 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 10:34 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 11:36 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 16:43 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 10:51 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 17:06 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 11:18 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 17:55 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 17:37 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:01 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:14 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:25 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:47 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:57 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:05 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:12 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:17 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:27 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:54 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:08 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:30 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 13:47 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 13:51 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:07 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:09 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 21:00 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:05 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 22:15 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:20 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 22:48 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:57 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:15 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:21 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 23:38 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 17:43 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 23:54 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:12 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:44 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:50 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:11 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 03:55 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:14 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:40 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:42 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-27 08:59 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:32 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:38 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:30 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 09:46 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:58 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-23 10:08 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 10:10 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 19:18 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:36 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-23 19:17 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 14:32 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-23 20:32 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-23 17:01 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-09-23 22:28 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 06:08 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:21 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 09:33 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:23 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-24 09:24 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 08:03 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:16 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 09:43 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 15:53 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 16:59 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 12:28 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 17:40 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:05 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:20 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:28 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 20:51 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:58 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:13 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:24 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:45 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:49 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:00 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:04 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 22:04 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 21:33 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:36 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:35 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:42 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:54 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 20:14 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 19:45 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 20:58 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 20:11 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 21:14 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 10:29 +0800
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 20:33 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 21:44 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 20:57 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:11 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 21:14 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:18 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 21:29 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:35 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-24 21:42 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:05 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 08:27 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 09:39 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 09:18 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 10:22 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 09:42 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 11:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 10:46 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 11:49 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 11:01 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 12:06 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 18:23 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 11:32 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 12:46 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 11:59 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 13:04 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 12:11 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 13:27 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 19:46 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 13:30 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 15:05 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 13:14 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 14:26 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 15:52 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 15:08 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 16:12 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 22:19 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 17:45 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-26 08:00 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 09:24 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 17:14 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 10:20 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 08:25 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-26 13:42 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 17:17 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 10:50 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 16:09 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-26 09:53 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 18:04 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 19:17 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-09-25 19:43 -0600
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-09-25 21:22 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 16:36 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 23:01 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 17:06 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 23:16 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 22:21 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 18:00 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 00:29 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 19:01 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 01:09 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 19:20 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 04:36 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-09-26 00:20 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 19:42 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 04:42 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-26 01:19 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 21:46 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-26 04:52 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 19:13 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 18:05 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 18:03 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:45 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:23 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:16 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:48 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:09 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 05:56 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 07:32 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 14:08 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 08:39 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:01 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 03:22 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-25 05:13 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:17 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-24 21:20 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:28 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 05:59 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 07:33 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 14:10 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-25 15:51 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:33 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-24 19:13 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions --- Honesty? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 21:33 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 03:17 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:21 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 14:49 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 10:14 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:37 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-25 15:55 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:19 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 22:22 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:52 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:15 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 06:04 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 07:35 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 14:14 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 08:42 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:05 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 14:44 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 09:46 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 15:24 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-25 11:51 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 19:05 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 16:28 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-25 04:09 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-09-25 05:06 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions --- Dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 23:13 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:31 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:36 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:40 -0400
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 21:58 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:28 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:34 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-24 20:54 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:16 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:26 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 13:57 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:12 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-24 22:17 +0100
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 14:47 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 16:53 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:07 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 17:13 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 15:19 -0700
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:33 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:39 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 00:49 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 19:52 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 01:00 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-24 20:23 -0500
Re: Turing computable functions Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-25 19:07 +0000
Re: Turing computable functions olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-19 22:35 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-20 13:05 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-09-20 23:26 +0100
Re: on deciding the undecidable Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-09-21 11:46 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-18 21:59 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-18 23:03 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 01:43 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 01:55 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-18 20:59 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-19 02:44 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 06:33 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-09-19 04:55 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-19 06:08 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-27 21:19 +0100
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 15:28 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-09-27 21:55 +0100
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 19:15 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-28 11:52 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-28 09:21 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-28 20:18 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-29 11:28 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 10:08 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-29 22:32 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-30 13:27 +0300
limit a person's ability for critical thinking olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 12:53 -0500
Re: limit a person's ability for critical thinking Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-01 11:32 +0300
Re: limit a person's ability for critical thinking Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-02 07:53 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-27 12:44 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-27 12:50 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 12:55 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 12:19 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-27 09:12 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 11:15 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 11:39 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-27 10:13 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-27 16:51 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 12:36 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-09-27 09:32 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 13:58 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-28 20:18 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-27 10:36 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-27 16:50 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-28 11:49 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable sion F2 <sionf2@drum.cc> - 2025-09-28 06:30 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-28 09:19 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-29 12:26 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 10:25 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-09-29 16:55 +0000
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-29 13:12 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-29 22:32 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-29 22:32 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-09-30 13:31 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-30 12:56 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-01 11:36 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable Olcott's paradigm shift olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 08:24 -0500
Re: on deciding the undecidable Olcott's paradigm shift "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-01 22:16 -0700
Re: on deciding the undecidable Olcott's paradigm shift Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-10-02 11:39 +0300
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-28 20:18 -0400
Re: on deciding the undecidable Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-27 09:00 -0400
Page 16 of 29 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 29 Next page →
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 13:47 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1ldo$3tgrt$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130142 |
On 9/24/2025 1:30 PM, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 3:08 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 9/24/2025 2:14 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 24/09/2025 20:01, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 9/24/2025 12:37 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>> >>>> <snip> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> How do you explain the idea that suspending a simulation causes >>>>>> the simuant to be non-halting, when the same subject directly >>>>>> executed show to be halting? >>>>> >>>>> From just my own two sentences (a) and (b) five LLM >>>>> systems figured out how to correctly decide the halting >>>>> problem's counter example input. >>>> >>>> Yep, and if you ask them nicely they'll tell you why you're talking >>>> crap. But your response fails to address Kaz's question. >>>> >>>> Evasion and misdirection: your favourite strategies. But the trouble >>>> with weasel words is that they make you sound like a weasel. >>> >>> That is counter-factual and defamation. >> >> It is factual; you completely dodged my question, as Richard says. >> > > They all figured out the recursive simulation non-halting > behavior pattern on their own. > > > If you pass "them" in a program like this, they will most likely all say its non-halting, but cleverly prints, I shall HALT: 10 PRINT "I shall HALT" 20 GOTO 10 You think that program is complicated? if so, why? I say its a very easy program to just look at. You seems to say now, it needs a simulator to lie to it???
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 13:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1ll2$3tgrt$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130154 |
On 9/24/2025 1:47 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 9/24/2025 1:30 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 9/24/2025 3:08 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On 9/24/2025 2:14 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>>> On 24/09/2025 20:01, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 9/24/2025 12:37 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>> >>>>> <snip> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How do you explain the idea that suspending a simulation causes >>>>>>> the simuant to be non-halting, when the same subject directly >>>>>>> executed show to be halting? >>>>>> >>>>>> From just my own two sentences (a) and (b) five LLM >>>>>> systems figured out how to correctly decide the halting >>>>>> problem's counter example input. >>>>> >>>>> Yep, and if you ask them nicely they'll tell you why you're talking >>>>> crap. But your response fails to address Kaz's question. >>>>> >>>>> Evasion and misdirection: your favourite strategies. But the trouble >>>>> with weasel words is that they make you sound like a weasel. >>>> >>>> That is counter-factual and defamation. >>> >>> It is factual; you completely dodged my question, as Richard says. >>> >> >> They all figured out the recursive simulation non-halting >> behavior pattern on their own. >> >> >> > > If you pass "them" in a program like this, they will most likely all say > its non-halting, but cleverly prints, I shall HALT: > > 10 PRINT "I shall HALT" > 20 GOTO 10 > > You think that program is complicated? if so, why? I say its a very easy > program to just look at. You seems to say now, it needs a simulator to > lie to it??? Just like you tried to tell me that BASIC does not handle recursion... Were you lying and/or just ignorant?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 20:07 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <20250924130419.173@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #130103 |
On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/24/2025 12:37 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> How do you explain the idea that suspending a simulation causes >> the simuant to be non-halting, when the same subject directly >> executed show to be halting? >> > > From just my own two sentences (a) and (b) five LLM > systems figured out how to correctly decide the halting > problem's counter example input. > ><Input to LLM systems> > Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input until: > (a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern: > abort simulation and return 0. > (b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement: > return 1. But I'm asking about the "abort simulation": in (a). All that means in your system is that HHH just quits the fetch-decode-execute loop that drives the simulation. How does that prove that the simulated procedure is non-terminating? Because you have faith that your non-terminating behavior pattern has no mistake whatsoever? What is the proof of that? -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 15:09 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1j5s$3t0ou$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130131 |
On 9/24/2025 3:07 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 9/24/2025 12:37 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>> How do you explain the idea that suspending a simulation causes >>> the simuant to be non-halting, when the same subject directly >>> executed show to be halting? >>> >> >> From just my own two sentences (a) and (b) five LLM >> systems figured out how to correctly decide the halting >> problem's counter example input. >> >> <Input to LLM systems> >> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input until: >> (a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern: >> abort simulation and return 0. >> (b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement: >> return 1. > > But I'm asking about the "abort simulation": in (a). All that means > in your system is that HHH just quits the fetch-decode-execute > loop that drives the simulation. > > How does that prove that the simulated procedure is non-terminating? > *The part that you erased* *The part that you erased* *The part that you erased* All five systems figured out the recursive simulation non-halting behavior pattern on their own. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 21:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <20250924135850.710@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #130133 |
On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: > *The part that you erased* > *The part that you erased* > *The part that you erased* > > All five systems figured out the recursive simulation Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs. Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last mention I make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 16:05 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1me9$3ts95$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130165 |
On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >> *The part that you erased* >> *The part that you erased* >> *The part that you erased* >> >> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation > > Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs. > > Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last mention I > make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it. > In other words you cannot show correct reasoning that they are incorrect probably because you know that they are correct. You can't believe the silly nonsense that HHH(DD) is more than one control flow. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 22:15 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1n0m$3r48q$9@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130170 |
On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>> *The part that you erased* >>> *The part that you erased* >>> *The part that you erased* >>> >>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation >> >> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs. >> >> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last >> mention I >> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it. >> > > In other words you cannot show correct reasoning > that they are incorrect Of course he can. It's not hard. The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them. You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't. Lies in, lies out. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 16:20 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1nbi$3u3l3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130174 |
On 9/24/2025 4:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote:
>> On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>>
>>>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation
>>>
>>> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs.
>>>
>>> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last mention I
>>> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it.
>>>
>>
>> In other words you cannot show correct reasoning
>> that they are incorrect
>
> Of course he can. It's not hard.
>
> The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them.
>
> You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't.
>
> Lies in, lies out.
>
This is your lie not mine. I only told them this truth
<truth>
Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input until:
(a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern:
abort simulation and return 0.
(b) Simulated input reaches its simulated "return" statement:
return 1.
</truth>
From just my own two sentences (a) and (b) five LLM
systems figured out how to correctly decide the halting
problem's counter example input.
They all figured out the recursive simulation non-halting
behavior pattern on their own.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 22:48 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1ovc$3qg9i$16@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130177 |
On 24/09/2025 22:20, olcott wrote:
> On 9/24/2025 4:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote:
>>> On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>>> *The part that you erased*
>>>>>
>>>>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation
>>>>
>>>> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs.
>>>>
>>>> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last
>>>> mention I
>>>> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In other words you cannot show correct reasoning
>>> that they are incorrect
>>
>> Of course he can. It's not hard.
>>
>> The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them.
>>
>> You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't.
>>
>> Lies in, lies out.
>>
>
> This is your lie not mine. I only told them this truth
>
> <truth>
> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's not truth. HHH gets DD wrong. We already explained to you
why that's wrong.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 16:57 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1ph3$3uiop$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130188 |
On 9/24/2025 4:48 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 24/09/2025 22:20, olcott wrote: >> On 9/24/2025 4:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>> On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote: >>>> On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>> >>>>>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation >>>>> >>>>> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs. >>>>> >>>>> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last mention I >>>>> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> In other words you cannot show correct reasoning >>>> that they are incorrect >>> >>> Of course he can. It's not hard. >>> >>> The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them. >>> >>> You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't. >>> >>> Lies in, lies out. >>> >> >> This is your lie not mine. I only told them this truth >> >> <truth> >> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > That's not truth. HHH gets DD wrong. We already explained to you why > that's wrong. > Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics of C not your stupidly incorrect expectations. DD does specify that it does call HHH(DD) in recursive simulation. Anyone that is competent that disagrees is a liar. This might get you condemned to actual Hell if such a place exists. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 15:15 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1qhc$3tgrt$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130191 |
On 9/24/2025 2:57 PM, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 4:48 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 24/09/2025 22:20, olcott wrote: >>> On 9/24/2025 4:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about LLMs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last mention I >>>>>> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything about it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In other words you cannot show correct reasoning >>>>> that they are incorrect >>>> >>>> Of course he can. It's not hard. >>>> >>>> The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them. >>>> >>>> You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't. >>>> >>>> Lies in, lies out. >>>> >>> >>> This is your lie not mine. I only told them this truth >>> >>> <truth> >>> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> That's not truth. HHH gets DD wrong. We already explained to you why >> that's wrong. >> > > Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics > of C not your stupidly incorrect expectations. > > DD does specify that it does call HHH(DD) in > recursive simulation. So this is different than just a "normal DD" that does it own thing, and does not call into HHH(*), right? Your example is moronic? How, I think dart asked this, is there a way to write up a DD that does call HHH? > Anyone that is competent > that disagrees is a liar. This might get you > condemned to actual Hell if such a place exists. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 15:21 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1qt7$3tgrt$8@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130195 |
On 9/24/2025 3:15 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 9/24/2025 2:57 PM, olcott wrote: [...] > How, I think dart asked this, is there a way to write up a DD that does > call HHH? [...] God damn it! I meant: How, I think dart asked this, is there a way to write up a DD that does _NOT_ call HHH? God damn typos! Sorry... ;^o
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 23:38 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1rtn$3v7g3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130191 |
On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 4:48 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 24/09/2025 22:20, olcott wrote: >>> On 9/24/2025 4:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 24/09/2025 22:05, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 9/24/2025 4:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >>>>>> On 2025-09-24, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> *The part that you erased* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All five systems figured out the recursive simulation >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course I'm going to erase any embarassing blather about >>>>>> LLMs. >>>>>> >>>>>> Going forward, I will try to be sure the above is the last >>>>>> mention I >>>>>> make of the subject, and the last time I quote anything >>>>>> about it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In other words you cannot show correct reasoning >>>>> that they are incorrect >>>> >>>> Of course he can. It's not hard. >>>> >>>> The AIs were doomed from the start, because you lied to them. >>>> >>>> You told them HHH *correctly* simulates DD, which it doesn't. >>>> >>>> Lies in, lies out. >>>> >>> >>> This is your lie not mine. I only told them this truth >>> >>> <truth> >>> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates its input >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> That's not truth. HHH gets DD wrong. We already explained to >> you why that's wrong. >> > > Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics > of C Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that isn't defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little left, and certainly nothing worth compiling. > not your stupidly incorrect expectations. Oh, no, HHH meets my expectations. It doesn't work. > DD does specify that it does call HHH(DD) in > recursive simulation. No, it just specifies a call to HHH. There's no recursion involved. For that to happen, a function would have to call itself, or two functions would have to call each other. DD doesn't call itself. DD does call HHH, but last I checked HHH doesn't call DD. HHH doesn't call itself either. There is no recursion. > Anyone that is competent that disagrees is a liar. I'll let others make up their own minds whether they consider me competent, but I most definitely disagree that DD recurses. In fact, DD doesn't actually appear on the call graph for Halt7.c. The only recursion I can see is in factorial, Infinite_Recursion, Infinite_Recursion3, and a cosily incestuous daisy-chain from Recursion_Chain_01 to Recursion_Chain_02 to Recursion_Chain_03 and back to Recursion_Chain_01. The call graph is a hundred lines of dot code; if anyone wants a copy, drop me an email. Caveat: it's a bloody mess. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 17:43 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1s78$3v7g5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130198 |
On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >> >> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >> of C > > Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that isn't defined > by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little left, and certainly > nothing worth compiling. > You understand that an input can be defined that attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail to understand that another different decider can decide this same input. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 23:54 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b1ss0$3vbme$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130199 |
On 24/09/2025 23:43, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >>> >>> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >>> of C >> >> Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that >> isn't defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little >> left, and certainly nothing worth compiling. >> > You understand that an input can be defined that > attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail > to understand that another different decider can > decide this same input. I understand that a diagonal case for one decider can be beaten by another decider, and that that decider has its own diagonal case that it can't defeat. The command line, for example, does a perfectly good job of deciding DD - and it isn't even supposed to be a decider! DD halts, by the way. Since we're being so understanding, I trust you understand that you're in no position to talk about C semantics. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 19:12 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b21dp$ff5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130200 |
On 9/24/2025 5:54 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 24/09/2025 23:43, olcott wrote: >> On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>> On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >>>> >>>> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >>>> of C >>> >>> Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that isn't >>> defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little left, and >>> certainly nothing worth compiling. >>> >> You understand that an input can be defined that >> attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail >> to understand that another different decider can >> decide this same input. > > I understand that a diagonal case for one decider can be beaten by > another decider, and that that decider has its own diagonal case that it > can't defeat. > Then you understand that this decider pair is HHH/HHH1 with the input DD. Thus you can infer from this that the behavior of DD relative to HHH is different than the the behavior of DD relative to HHH1. > The command line, for example, does a perfectly good job of deciding DD > - and it isn't even supposed to be a decider! > > DD halts, by the way. > > Since we're being so understanding, I trust you understand that you're > in no position to talk about C semantics. > -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-25 00:44 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <20250924174225.329@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #130202 |
On 2025-09-25, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9/24/2025 5:54 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 24/09/2025 23:43, olcott wrote: >>> On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >>>>> of C >>>> >>>> Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that isn't >>>> defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little left, and >>>> certainly nothing worth compiling. >>>> >>> You understand that an input can be defined that >>> attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail >>> to understand that another different decider can >>> decide this same input. >> >> I understand that a diagonal case for one decider can be beaten by >> another decider, and that that decider has its own diagonal case that it >> can't defeat. >> > > Then you understand that this decider pair is HHH/HHH1 > with the input DD. Thus you can infer from this that > the behavior of DD relative to HHH is different than > the the behavior of DD relative to HHH1. If HHH and HHH1 are completely different deciders, and DD is built on HHH, not calling into HH1, then: HH1 has no relationship with DD. DD does not hae two different behaviors in connection with HHH1 and HHH. DD's behavior is determined by HHH(DD) and is completely disconnected from HHH1. -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-24 19:50 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b23k9$rik$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130211 |
On 9/24/2025 7:44 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2025-09-25, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 9/24/2025 5:54 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>> On 24/09/2025 23:43, olcott wrote: >>>> On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>>> On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >>>>>> of C >>>>> >>>>> Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that isn't >>>>> defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious little left, and >>>>> certainly nothing worth compiling. >>>>> >>>> You understand that an input can be defined that >>>> attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail >>>> to understand that another different decider can >>>> decide this same input. >>> >>> I understand that a diagonal case for one decider can be beaten by >>> another decider, and that that decider has its own diagonal case that it >>> can't defeat. >>> >> >> Then you understand that this decider pair is HHH/HHH1 >> with the input DD. Thus you can infer from this that >> the behavior of DD relative to HHH is different than >> the the behavior of DD relative to HHH1. > > If HHH and HHH1 are completely different deciders, and DD > is built on HHH, not calling into HH1, then: > > HH1 has no relationship with DD. > > DD does not hae two different behaviors in connection with HHH1 and HHH. > DD's behavior is determined by HHH(DD) and is completely > disconnected from HHH1. > You understand that an input can be defined that attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail to understand that another different decider can decide this same input. And still don't understand that HHH/DD and HHH1/DD are the above decider pair. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-25 04:11 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b2bs4$22uc$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130215 |
On 25/09/2025 01:50, olcott wrote: <snip> > You understand that an input can be defined that > attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail to > understand that another different decider can decide > this same input. > > And still don't understand that HHH/DD and HHH1/DD > are the above decider pair. > Already rebutted. DD doesn't call HHH1. HHH doesn't call HHH1. Therefore DD is not the diagonal case for HHH1. HHH1 has one, of course, but DD isn't it. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-09-25 03:55 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Turing computable functions --- CHEATER |
| Message-ID | <10b2avo$22uc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #130202 |
On 25/09/2025 01:12, olcott wrote: > On 9/24/2025 5:54 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >> On 24/09/2025 23:43, olcott wrote: >>> On 9/24/2025 5:38 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote: >>>> On 24/09/2025 22:57, olcott wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Correctly simulated is defined by the semantics >>>>> of C >>>> >>>> Not so. If I took your Halt7.c and removed everything that >>>> isn't defined by the semantics of C, there'd be precious >>>> little left, and certainly nothing worth compiling. >>>> >>> You understand that an input can be defined that >>> attempts to thwart a specific decider yet fail >>> to understand that another different decider can >>> decide this same input. >> >> I understand that a diagonal case for one decider can be beaten >> by another decider, and that that decider has its own diagonal >> case that it can't defeat. >> > > Then you understand that this decider pair is HHH/HHH1 > with the input DD. No, you haven't shown that. You have shown that HHH fails to decides DD, but I haven't seen any proof that HHH decides DD. DD doesn't call HHH1, and I see from my callgraph that HHH doesn't call HHH1. In fact, nothing does. > Thus you can infer from this that > the behavior of DD relative to HHH is different than > the the behavior of DD relative to HHH1. No, I can't. DD is what it is. Its behaviour depends on its own source and on the result from HHH. You can change its behaviour only by changing HHH's decision. HHH1 is not currently on the table. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 16 of 29 — ← Prev page 1 … 14 15 [16] 17 18 … 29 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.theory
csiph-web