Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #35756 > unrolled thread
| Started by | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-07-05 11:28 -0500 |
| Last post | 2021-07-08 20:37 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 334 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.theory
How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 11:28 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 13:06 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 12:17 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 13:54 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 14:30 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 15:54 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-05 22:34 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 16:40 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 17:48 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 17:41 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 19:14 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 00:15 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 19:04 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 20:45 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 20:01 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 21:22 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 21:37 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 06:38 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 04:14 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 03:33 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 22:06 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 13:39 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 10:59 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 02:55 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:29 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 11:33 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 11:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 13:28 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 11:32 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 14:16 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:32 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (correct halt deciding criterion measure) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 02:56 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V2) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 21:00 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V2) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 16:32 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 11:24 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 10:53 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 13:10 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 11:59 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 14:51 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 13:47 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 14:35 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 16:49 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 20:18 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 20:24 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 21:45 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 21:04 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 22:45 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 22:03 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 06:56 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 07:46 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 23:39 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 22:54 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-08 22:15 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 23:26 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-08 22:44 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ independent v dependent variables ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 23:53 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 22:10 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 22:53 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 06:58 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 07:58 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 06:12 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 08:35 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 07:12 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 09:18 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 07:41 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-08 17:07 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 11:24 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 09:55 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-08 23:52 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 20:07 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-09 02:48 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 21:21 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 21:36 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-09 12:30 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 05:56 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 08:59 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com> - 2021-07-09 17:59 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 20:32 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 19:28 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-09 18:06 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 12:47 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-09 20:16 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 14:24 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 12:33 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-09 22:08 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 16:13 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 12:40 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 08:54 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 15:30 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 10:00 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 16:15 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 10:21 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 16:25 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 08:30 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 16:33 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 08:34 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 08:45 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 11:08 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-10 17:34 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 11:42 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 10:54 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 11:23 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 11:41 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 13:15 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 08:24 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 15:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2021-07-11 00:29 +0000
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 19:57 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 20:33 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 22:59 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-09 23:10 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 17:41 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 12:28 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 10:50 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-09 22:59 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 17:29 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-10 00:23 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 18:31 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-10 01:13 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 19:33 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 01:57 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 20:00 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 03:08 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 22:13 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-10 23:13 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-11 07:14 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 00:27 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 01:07 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 01:39 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 01:42 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 09:16 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 09:16 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 11:10 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 09:30 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-11 20:04 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ]( Flibble agrees ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 14:47 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-11 22:35 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 09:13 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-12 09:20 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Theperfect Parrotsstore <theperfectparrotsstore@gmail.com> - 2021-07-12 08:23 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 12:35 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-12 12:39 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-12 17:18 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-12 18:00 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 08:41 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 07:57 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 09:42 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-13 07:54 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 10:02 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 22:23 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 15:52 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-14 22:09 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 16:47 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 21:03 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 20:57 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 22:12 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 21:57 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 01:44 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 09:17 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-15 21:04 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 16:31 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 15:08 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 15:18 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 16:13 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] "dklei...@gmail.com" <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 16:54 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 19:42 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-17 07:25 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-16 01:17 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 19:52 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-16 03:09 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-15 22:03 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-17 01:43 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-16 19:07 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-16 19:29 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-16 19:54 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-16 22:34 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-16 21:11 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-16 21:48 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-17 07:44 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-18 02:27 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 18:43 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-18 03:45 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 23:05 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-19 10:11 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-16 22:52 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-15 13:12 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-16 22:39 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 09:08 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 10:33 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 09:36 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 10:43 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 10:11 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 17:21 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 16:44 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 17:55 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 17:08 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 18:50 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 18:20 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 19:32 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 19:02 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 20:11 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 19:42 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 20:52 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 20:07 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 21:14 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-13 20:30 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-13 21:42 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 22:29 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 15:53 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-14 15:01 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 16:39 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 21:06 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-13 23:13 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-14 10:07 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-14 21:35 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-12 21:20 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-12 21:15 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-12 21:10 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-11 06:54 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ suspended not halted ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-11 09:14 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-09 20:39 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 20:08 -0700
The (binary decision) tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 22:30 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 20:42 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 22:18 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-09 21:46 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 23:01 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-09 22:28 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 23:45 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-09 23:24 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 22:32 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 22:39 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 23:01 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 09:25 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-10 09:12 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ type mismatch error ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 10:32 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ type mismatch error ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-10 09:48 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ type mismatch error ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-10 11:19 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 21:51 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 21:59 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 21:01 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-09 21:17 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 23:24 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 23:50 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 23:43 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 23:40 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 20:17 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 20:31 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 21:51 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 21:07 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 22:51 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 22:04 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-08 07:02 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 08:29 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-09 00:05 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-08 23:27 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-09 05:53 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-09 09:02 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 20:59 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 23:15 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 13:07 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 08:27 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 07:42 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 10:26 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:02 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 02:56 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 21:59 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-06 21:18 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 15:41 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-06 23:18 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 16:13 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 18:38 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 18:44 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 16:53 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 18:56 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 17:46 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 19:50 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 17:56 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 20:18 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 18:37 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 20:43 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 18:55 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 19:06 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:19 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 08:01 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-06 20:47 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 03:23 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 22:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 00:55 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 09:35 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 09:29 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 16:31 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 10:53 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 17:33 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 12:06 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 20:28 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 14:54 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 10:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 12:21 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-07 19:05 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 13:30 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-07 14:28 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 16:44 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 15:50 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 18:09 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 20:22 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:08 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 14:31 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 22:35 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-07 11:46 +0100
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 04:50 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 09:47 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 20:26 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 17:34 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 20:15 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 22:00 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 21:08 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-07 22:51 -0400
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 14:18 +0200
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 14:39 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 14:52 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 17:05 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 15:41 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 18:04 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 16:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 18:34 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] "dklei...@gmail.com" <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 17:03 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-07 19:14 -0500
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 17:19 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-07 17:26 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 02:41 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 02:50 -0700
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-08 14:08 -0600
Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? [ proof ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-08 20:37 -0700
Page 6 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 17 Next page →
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 10:54 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) |
| Message-ID | <723d12e2-6eea-482a-94b3-7065485fc7afn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36062 |
me bob and god vote nay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 11:23 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) |
| Message-ID | <cd4d7621-41b8-4ae7-b819-cfe24b6cdbben@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36069 |
On Saturday, July 10, 2021 at 1:54:22 PM UTC-4, Daniel Pehoushek wrote: > me bob and god vote nay heres a #P benchmark single file with ten formulas of c3d5n180 [c3d5n180_0.veg 1] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 919104 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2983116 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 33874824 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1248180 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 34530372 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 18696 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 694674 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5132340 9 (n 360 m 1527) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1347 ): #P 116442 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 326802 [c3d5n180_0.veg 10 (t 79844550 z 0 )(work 5171490 0 10)]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 11:41 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) |
| Message-ID | <8fa91b7f-28d5-432d-9118-4608c2ba80c5n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36072 |
On Saturday, July 10, 2021 at 2:23:12 PM UTC-4, Daniel Pehoushek wrote: > On Saturday, July 10, 2021 at 1:54:22 PM UTC-4, Daniel Pehoushek wrote: > > me bob and god vote nay > heres a #P benchmark single file with ten formulas of c3d5n180 > [c3d5n180_0.veg 1] > 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 919104 > 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2983116 > 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 33874824 > 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1248180 > 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 34530372 > 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 18696 > 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 694674 > 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5132340 > 9 (n 360 m 1527) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1347 ): #P 116442 > 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 326802 > [c3d5n180_0.veg 10 (t 79844550 z 0 )(work 5171490 0 10)] [c3d5n180_1.veg 2] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 101082 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 460092 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1353252 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 8940330 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 261384 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 3113490 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 127644 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 8576454 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 6251232 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2712882 [c3d5n180_1.veg 10 (t 31897842 z 0 )(work 5044038 0 12)] [c3d5n180_2.veg 3] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 70412424 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 43002012 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 26534202 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 7032636 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 258318 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5771424 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5866218 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 19928724 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 383058 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5050914 [c3d5n180_2.veg 10 (t 184239930 z 0 )(work 6317313 0 11)] [c3d5n180_3.veg 4] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 170340 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 8088942 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 272760 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1279278 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 32627124 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 102066396 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 87438 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 12689436 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 39714 10 (n 360 m 1527) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1347 ): #P 575850 [c3d5n180_3.veg 10 (t 157897278 z 0 )(work 5246887 0 9)] [c3d5n180_4.veg 5] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 84840 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 28343298 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1188 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 12683664 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 347844 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 926226 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 7648428 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 652644702 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1104942 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 565536 [c3d5n180_4.veg 10 (t 704350668 z 0 )(work 8923909 0 13)] [c3d5n180_5.veg 6] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 199176 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 7341966 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 112831920 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 949992 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 22416780 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1302270 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 5456652 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1011756 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 483852 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 52632 [c3d5n180_5.veg 10 (t 152046996 z 0 )(work 6390588 0 11)] [c3d5n180_6.veg 7] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1194 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1609440 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 48870 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 8192574 5 (n 360 m 1527) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1347 ): #P 6145812 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 30102648 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1686510 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 511230 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 276078 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 6930660 [c3d5n180_6.veg 10 (t 55505016 z 0 )(work 4815315 0 10)] [c3d5n180_7.veg 8] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 83532 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 221094 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2954412 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 38370 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 6714966 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 791238 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 21439542 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1221204 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 811746 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 10735200 [c3d5n180_7.veg 10 (t 45011304 z 0 )(work 4113719 0 9)] [c3d5n180_8.veg 9] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1978566 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 684132 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 641826 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 397164 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1932570 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 396258 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 20972718 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2165934 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 62496 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 31335378 [c3d5n180_8.veg 10 (t 60567042 z 0 )(work 4229095 0 9)] [c3d5n180_9.veg 10] 1 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 117816 2 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 210624 3 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1879752 4 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2219064 5 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 1929486 6 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 685386 7 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2700444 8 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 83250 9 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 979176 10 (n 360 m 1530) (bobs 541 om 1441 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 180 3 0 4 1350 ): #P 2415558 [c3d5n180_9.veg 10 (t 13220556 z 0 )(work 3643095 0 9)] [bigsums (tfiles 10 tforms 100) (numberp 1484581182 zeromos 0)(retros 53895449 bigoh 107 Billion 83624150)]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 13:15 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ]( You and I ) |
| Message-ID | <05595657-cc37-449d-a93e-04747b649320n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36078 |
the grayness of gods reals is just a tiny square bitmap
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 08:24 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <6c2fe4ad-69e4-4122-af65-0288aceb1737n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36048 |
num Lessone(num g)
{
num p = zero; for(p=zero; (p+one) < g ; p=((p + g )>>one)){/*theObserverSystemCore(p,g);*/} return p;
}
i have a candidate location for the decider
of my pspace solver bob in Lessone above
with the toplevel davisputnam control system below
tis a beginning anyway
joy env::epluribusunum(Bob* b , Goods& sets, bignum& r)//why simple is good
{ passionmustdepth++;// ten line depth first solver
when((passionmustretros++ & tautologies[ten + siv]) == zero) when(two < studylevel) { prin("%u", passionmustdepth); }
while(eon()&&(*b).manyp()){Bob* lobub=b;num a=Bob::unity((*lobub).t_r_e_e,(*lobub).wyde());
num be=syze();assume(lobub,a);dollar(be,r,b);when(qlog&&eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);
when(eon()){epluribusunum(b,sets,r);}
unassume(lobub,a,be,b);dollar(be,r,b);
when(qlog){when(satisfiablenumber&&r.n.size()){passionmustdepth=Lessone(passionmustdepth);return;}
when(eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);}}///rest of ways of b and end while tail closure
when(eon()){when(onemodelp())addsolution(r);otherwise composition(sets,r);}// build more r through composition
passionmustdepth = Lessone( passionmustdepth );
}//end of epluribusunum//
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 15:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <877dhx7qww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #36048 |
Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes:
[196 lines deleted]
*Please* stop cross-posting this stuff to comp.lang.c, or to any group
other than comp.theory. I know it's olcott who insists on adding
irrelevant newsgroups, but I don't see his posts. Please edit the
Newsgroups: header line before posting a followup.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-11 00:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <scde1q$3bd2h$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #36101 |
In article <877dhx7qww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes: >[196 lines deleted] > >*Please* stop cross-posting this stuff to comp.lang.c, or to any group >other than comp.theory. I know it's olcott who insists on adding >irrelevant newsgroups, but I don't see his posts. Please edit the >Newsgroups: header line before posting a followup. Like you did? -- The only thing Trump's made great again is Saturday Night Live.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 19:57 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <l9ydnQnoXoNl3Hf9nZ2dnUU7-UOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36107 |
On 7/10/2021 7:29 PM, Kenny McCormack wrote: > In article <877dhx7qww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>, > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >> Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes: >> [196 lines deleted] >> >> *Please* stop cross-posting this stuff to comp.lang.c, or to any group >> other than comp.theory. I know it's olcott who insists on adding >> irrelevant newsgroups, but I don't see his posts. Please edit the >> Newsgroups: header line before posting a followup. > > Like you did? > Flibble is only reviewing my work because I cross-posted and it turns out that he is a great reviewer. Kaz Kylheku only reviewed my work because I cross-posted and he is my best reviewer so far. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 20:33 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <87v95h5xtu.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #36109 |
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
[...]
>> In article <877dhx7qww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>,
>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes:
>>> [196 lines deleted]
>>>
>>> *Please* stop cross-posting this stuff to comp.lang.c, or to any group
>>> other than comp.theory. I know it's olcott who insists on adding
>>> irrelevant newsgroups, but I don't see his posts. Please edit the
>>> Newsgroups: header line before posting a followup.
[...]
>
> Flibble is only reviewing my work because I cross-posted and it turns
> out that he is a great reviewer. Kaz Kylheku only reviewed my work
> because I cross-posted and he is my best reviewer so far.
olcott, I wasn't talking to you. I'm aware that you'll continue to
annoy people by cross-posting to inappropriate newsgroups. I've dealt
with that by killfiling you in comp.lang.c. I'm asking those who reply
to you, including Flibble and Kaz, to restrict their followups to
comp.theory, whether you do or not. You're a lost cause. They might
not be.
I'm aware that some newsreaders might make it difficult to edit the
Newsgroups: header line.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 22:59 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ strachey example ] |
| Message-ID | <Zb2dnS1w1dYy8Xf9nZ2dnUU7-SPNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36121 |
On 7/10/2021 10:33 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes: > [...] >>> In article <877dhx7qww.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>, >>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes: >>>> [196 lines deleted] >>>> >>>> *Please* stop cross-posting this stuff to comp.lang.c, or to any group >>>> other than comp.theory. I know it's olcott who insists on adding >>>> irrelevant newsgroups, but I don't see his posts. Please edit the >>>> Newsgroups: header line before posting a followup. > [...] >> >> Flibble is only reviewing my work because I cross-posted and it turns >> out that he is a great reviewer. Kaz Kylheku only reviewed my work >> because I cross-posted and he is my best reviewer so far. > > olcott, I wasn't talking to you. I'm aware that you'll continue to > annoy people by cross-posting to inappropriate newsgroups. I've dealt > with that by killfiling you in comp.lang.c. I'm asking those who reply > to you, including Flibble and Kaz, to restrict their followups to > comp.theory, whether you do or not. You're a lost cause. They might > not be. > > I'm aware that some newsreaders might make it difficult to edit the > Newsgroups: header line. > Wouldn't it be worth the slight annoyance of a little cross-posting if the cross-posting made the difference between actually validating that the halting problem proofs really have been correctly refuted? -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 23:10 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <87im1j16ma.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #35993 |
Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes: (about halting) I'd urge you to consider trimming the newsgroups if you want to reply to PO. He will add in all the irrelevant groups again because does not respect topicality, but that does not mean we should not be more polite. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 17:41 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <JdqdnSsm4pIRTXX9nZ2dnUU7-bOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36002 |
On 7/9/2021 5:10 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> writes: > (about halting) > > I'd urge you to consider trimming the newsgroups if you want to reply to > PO. He will add in all the irrelevant groups again because does not > respect topicality, but that does not mean we should not be more > polite. > In do not add comp.lang.c to stupid replies. I have started to also trim comp.lang.c from stupid replies. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 12:28 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <e2e0d789-c950-4fa6-ae68-4af79ccaf2c9n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35987 |
sea shell sam adams beer today beer racial memory once sci friday sculpture in in writing in formations stars to holes racial memory satisffying models count log #P equal in identity unequal in mass these trees
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 10:50 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <cc0188ed-4471-4faf-9ab8-288cee80c7b4n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #35983 |
dear model counting competition 2021
just hanging out until i hear from you "is bob totally correct?"
playing with archimedes again
daniel (little d)
On Friday, July 9, 2021 at 1:06:45 PM UTC-4, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 08:59:51 -0500
> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> wrote:
> > [Halt Deciding Axiom] When the pure simulation of the machine
> > description ⟨P⟩ of a machine P on its input I never halts we know
> > that P(I) never halts.
> >
> > No we cannot. In order to remove the pathological feedback loop such
> > that P does the opposite of whatever H decides H simply acts as a
> > pure simulator of P thus having no effect what-so-ever on the
> > behavior of P until after its halt status decision has been made.
> Except your decider can only handle trivial uninteresting cases: if you
> wish to make progress on this then prove your decider works with a
> non-trivial case which includes branching logic predicated on arbitrary
> program input that is unknown a priori to the simulation starting; but
> before you even do that prove your decider works with a non-trivial
> case with branching logic predicated on arbitrary program input that
> *is* known a priori.
>
> I also note that you repeatedly refuse to address my point regarding how
> x86 mov instructions can read/write from/to memory mapped I/O
> rather than RAM so the result of the mov instruction cannot be known a
> priori. The halting program concerns computing devices and a computing
> device which cannot do I/O is next to useless, much like your decider
> (until you actually prove otherwise which I have a feeling is never
> going to happen as you appear to be stuck in a loop).
>
> /Flibble
dear comp dot theory
monotone reason is linearly decidable
i agree deciders are important to clean running systems so
before discussing the details of bob try this...
i call bobs one line theoretical decider /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g);*/
i place the decider of the pspace solver on line four of bob source code
with the davis putnam code further along in the one thousand lines of
bob source code with the decider being called last with Lessone(depth)
typedef unsigned long num;
const num one = (num)true; /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g)*/
const num zero = one >> one; /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g)*/
num Lessone(num g){num p = zero; for(p=zero; (p+one)<g; p=((p+g)>>one)) { /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g);*/ } return p;}
...
joy env::epluribusunum(Bob* b, Goods& sets, bignum& r)//why simple is good
{ passionmustdepth++;
when((passionmustretros++ & tautologies[ten + siv]) == zero) when(two < studylevel) { prin("%u", passionmustdepth); }
while(eon()&&(*b).manyp()){Bob* lobub=b;num a=Bob::unity((*lobub).t_r_e_e,(*lobub).wyde());
num be=syze();assume(lobub,a);dollar(be,r,b);when(qlog&&eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);
when(eon()){epluribusunum(b,sets,r);}
unassume(lobub,a,be,b);dollar(be,r,b);
when(qlog){when(satisfiablenumber&&r.n.size()){passionmustdepth=Lessone(passionmustdepth);return;}
when(eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);}}
when(eon()){when(onemodelp())addsolution(r);otherwise composition(sets,r);}
passionmustdepth = Lessone( passionmustdepth ); }
num theObserverSystemCore(num p, num g)
{
when (g > 21) haltbob();// trivial beginning
}
go ben go ben go ben
(Expecting a direct answer to any of these questions is the triumph of
hope over experience.)
So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
"We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
problem"
or
"This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
non-halting computations and a few more."
It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
Is it comfy?
dear ben i would write
So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
"i believe that my generating my halt deciding formula is equivalent to the halting problem"
or
"Thisshit maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of non minus halting computations plus a few more"
Thank you. Your directness make me hopeful that you'll be clear about
some other things... How long have you though that "and a few more" was
correct? I.e. how long have you been arguing for a position you now
concede is mistaken? Months? Years? Decades?
You have refused to accept the definition of the halting problem for
decades. Do you now accept that every string has a correct yes/no
answer as far as halting is concerned, and that "yes" is the correct
answer for those strings that represent halting computations and "no" is
the correct answer for all the others?
And since we now know that your "halt deciding criteria is the same as
the halting problem" we can ditch all the waffle about simulation. It's
just halting as conventionally defined.
Your favourite book, and your favourite quoted lines from it, make it(page 185 theorem 7.18, relativization, now at best a gray area)
quite clear that (universally quantify)
halting computations like P(P) need to be accepted not (P=NP for small n)
rejected. P(P) halts, but H(P,P) == 0 which is wrong. So what have you (P~=NP for large n)
now after all this time except a huge mistake?(P+=NP in principle)
--
Ben.
think the claim is that it's good (maybe even better that all the rest),
but that does not imply manufacturing cryptocurrency good, does it?
++Ben.
Um, I think I would have that that polynomial-run-time algorithm for an NP-complete problem
which is also feasible-run-time (that's a somewhat vaguely defined term of course)
would indeed pretty much imply that you can now manufacture Bitcoin
at a much lower cost than the usual Bitcoin-mining hardware...
Although mind you I am not exactly an expert on the relevant mathematics here.
my present investment position for fifty years is
one buy procter and gamble
buy gold trading volume
buy silver
buy copper
buy palladium
buy platinum
+++
dear committee
is bob totally correct?
Hard
• The first problem that is proved to
be NP-Complete [S. Cook, 1971]
• ETH says 3-SAT cannot be solved in
2
𝑜 𝑛
time, and SETH says 𝑘-SAT
needs roughly 2
𝑛
time for large k.
Introduction
• Main Ideas
• A Novel Framework of hybrid solvers
• Phase Resetting with Local Search Assignments
• Branching with Conflict Frequency in Local Search
• Experiments
As far as we know, this is the first work that meets the
standard of the challenge 7 “Demonstrate the
successful combination of stochastic search and
systematic search techniques, by the creation of a
new algorithm that outperforms the best previous
examples of both approaches.” on standard
application benchmarks.
Thank you!
Any question?
yes
Proof Complexity of
Symbolic QBF Reasoning
Stefan Mengel and Friedrich Slivovsky
for bob qbf validity is (Times(n,#P));
where Times is
num Times(num a, num b)
{ //times is stupid for now // fast fourier transform later //
if (a > (one >> one)) return b + (Times(Lessone(a), b));
else return (one >> one);//humans will never understand the truly mortal views of the goddess of all creation
}
const num Truth = Times(Times((three + Lessone(three)), (Lessone(three) + three)), (Times(three, Times(three, three)) + three + Lessone(Lessone(three))));
const num onehundred = Times(ten, ten); // perfed perfed perfed
const num seventhtau = onehundred + Times(three, Times(three, three));
const num onethousand = Times(ten, Times(ten, ten));
const num tenthousand = Times(ten, onethousand );
const num onemillion = Times(onethousand , onethousand);
const num onebillion = Times(onethousand, onemillion); //theObserver notices another bob is beginning here
#define when if
#define otherwise else
const num sivteen = siv + ten;
const num thirtyone = sivteen+ten+five;
num diagovreason [] = { // zero curses upon the idea of aleph null of the other diagonal // nonpolynomial is atbest a gray area//jdp
(num)4294967294, (num)4294967293, (num)4294967291, (num)4294967287,
(num)4294967279, (num)4294967263, (num)4294967231, (num)4294967167,
(num)4294967039, (num)4294966783, (num)4294966271, (num)4294965247,
(num)4294963199, (num)4294959103, (num)4294950911, (num)4294934527,
(num)4294901759, (num)4294836223, (num)4294705151, (num)4294443007,
(num)4293918719, (num)4292870143, (num)4290772991, (num)4286578687,
(num)4278190079, (num)4261412863, (num)4227858431, (num)4160749567,
(num)4026531839, (num)3758096383, (num)3221225471, (num)2147483647 };
num oneoffour[] = { zero, zero, one, zero, two, zero, one, zero, three, zero, one, zero, two, zero, one, zero };/// handmade reasoning table
num ones[] = { one, two, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16384, 32768, 65536, 131072, 262144, 524288,
1048576, 2097152, 4194304, 8388608, 16777216, 33554432, 67108864, 134217728, 268435456, 536870912, 1073741824, 2147483648 };/// handmade reasoning table
num countdown[] = { zero, zero, one, two, three, four, five, siv, seven, seven + one, seven + two, seven + three, seven + four, seven + five, seven + siv,
seven + seven, seven + seven + one, seven + seven + two, seven + seven + three, seven + seven + four, seven + seven + five, seven + seven + siv, seven + seven + seven,
seven + seven + seven + one, seven + seven + seven + two, seven + seven + seven + three, seven + seven + seven + four, seven + seven + seven + five,
seven + seven + seven + siv, seven + seven + seven + seven, seven + seven + seven + seven + one, seven + seven + seven + seven + two, thirtyone };
num tautologies [] ={ zero, one, three, seven, seven+seven+one, thirtyone, thirtyone+one+thirtyone, 127, 255, 511, 1023, 2047, 4095, 8191, 16383, 32767, 65535 };
const num fourthtau = tautologies [four];
const num fifthtau = tautologies [five];
const num sivthtau = tautologies [siv];
const num thetenthtau = tautologies [ten];
num minusbit(num bits, num g)
{
when (g <= fifthtau) {
when (bits & (one << g)) bits &= diagovreason[g];
otherwise { bits += (one << g); bits = minusbit(bits, g + one); }
}
return bits;
}
num Minus(num more, num less)
{
for(num g = fifthtau; g > zero; g = Lessone(g)) when (less & (one << g)) more = minusbit(more, g);
when (less & one) more = minusbit(more, zero);
return more;
}
#define sayvum static
#define escLoop break;
#define prin printf
#define fprin fprintf
typedef void oy;
typedef oy joy;
#define yaythen when
#define wethorse otherwise
num memrefs = zero;
template < class tt > class set { // fibolacci 0 1 2 4 7 11 17 26 /// space growth of ordered sets
public:
joy allocay(num get){if(have<get){tt* tmp=new tt[(num)get];if(tmp ==(tt*)zero){}else{for(num h=zero;h<have;h++){tmp[h]=v[h];v[h]=(tt)zero;}when(v==(tt*)zero){}else{delete[]v;}{have=zero;v=tmp;have=get;tmp=(tt*)zero;}}}}
joy add(tt elt) { memrefs++; if (y == have) { allocay((one + (y >> one) + y)); } v[y] = elt; y++; }
inline num size() { memrefs++; return y; }
inline num lgsize() { memrefs++; num lg = zero; num tmp = y; while (tmp = tmp >> one) { lg++; } return lg; }
inline tt& operator[](num r) { memrefs++; return v[r]; }
num setsize(num z) { memrefs++; y = z; return y; }
tt slop() { memrefs++; tt ret = (tt)zero; if (y) { y = Lessone(y); ret = v[y]; v[y] = (tt)zero; } else {}return ret; }
tt last() { memrefs++; tt ret = (tt)zero; if (y) { ret = v[Lessone(y)]; } return ret; }
num memberp(tt elt) { for (num g = zero; g < size(); g++) if (v[g] == elt) { return one; } return zero; }
joy clear() { for (num g = zero; g < have; g++)v[g] = (tt)zero; y = zero; }
~set() { clear(); when(v == (tt*)zero) {}otherwise{ delete[]v; }y = zero; have = zero; v = (tt*)zero; }
set(num beg) : y(zero), have(zero), v((tt*)zero) { when(beg) allocay(beg); }
set() : y(zero), have(zero), v((tt*)zero) { }
num y; num have; tt* v;
};/// class ordered set class ordered set class ordered set // (ten + three) procedures + three datamembers //jdp
typedef set<num> nums; /*77inbob 117indoggy*/ typedef set<nums*> numnums; /*37*///76//33indoggy
numnums numsstack; nums* getnums(num desire) { when(numsstack.size()) return numsstack.slop(); return new nums(desire); } joy putnums(nums* big) { (*big).clear(); numsstack.add(big); }//192
typedef unsigned long long nuum;/*12*///41//15indoggy
const num letterzero = '0'; const num letternine = letterzero + three + three + three;//89
const num carriagereturn = '\n'; // once upon a time i briefly worked on metafont for dek himself
const num lettercee = 'c'; /*const num letteree = 'e';*/ const num lettereff = 'f';
/*const num lettergee = 'g';*/ const num letteren = 'n'; const num letterpee = 'p';
/*const num lettervee = 'v';*/ const num letterw = 'w';
const num twiddle = '~'; const num minusletter = '-'; const num letterplus = '+';//const num spaceletter = ' ';
const num lettercomma = ',';
const num endoffileletter = (num)EOF; // letter consts
const char* stringzero = "0"; const char* stringone = "1"; const char* stringletterc = "%c";
#define itbadsin int // int is bad // capital letters use something similar to a sign bit and therefore disturb the mind //JDP//jdp
class bignum; typedef set < bignum* > bignums; typedef set < bignums* > bignumums; bignums bignumstack; bignum* getbignum(); joy putbignum(bignum* big);
+++
Proof Complexity of
Symbolic QBF Reasoning
Stefan Mengel and Friedrich Slivovsky
exponential lower bounds
class bignum { /*50*///47indoggy
public: nums n; bignum& operator++() { foundationofreason(zero); return *this; } //see epluribusunum
... by me for one thousand lines ... now i study them and theirs
Definition (Messner, Toran 98)
A proof system in language L is optimal if and only if it can
simulate all other proof systems for L.
with NP oracles since the inference is just propositional.
+++
While modern SAT solvers perform poorly on such instances for n > 20,
PB solvers based on cutting-planes may solve them in linear time
1/17
Pseudo-Boolean (PB) Constraints
PB solvers generalize SAT solvers to take into account
• normalized PB constraints ∑n
i=1 αiℓi ≥ δ
• cardinality constraints ∑n
i=1
ℓi ≥ δ
• clauses ∑n
i=1
ℓi ≥ 1 ≡
∨n
i=1
ℓi
in which
• the coefficients αi are non-negative integers
• ℓi are literals, i.e., a variable v or its negation ¯v = 1 − v
• the degree δ is a non-negative integer
2/17
CDCL in PB Solvers
Modern SAT solvers are very efficient in practice, especially because of
the conflict-driven clause learning architecture
i count two >= sybols where bob has zero
and then the core of the problem i would then read
• the coefficients αi are non-negative integers
• ℓi are literals, i.e., a variable v or its negation ¯v = 1 − v
• the degree δ is a non-negative integer
+ ai are non minus negative integers
+jdp ai are nums
+ li are literals
• the degree d is five
The score of a variable is ∶= ℎ𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒(𝑥) + 𝑜𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒(𝑥)
Thanksfor listening
The Problem: Projected Model Counting
3
Projected Model Counting (#ƎSAT)
How many solutions does ∃𝑌. 𝜑 have?
#P
NP[1]
-Complete
Model Counting (#SAT)
How many solutions does 𝜑 have?
#P-Complete
Satisfiability (SAT)
Does 𝜑 have a solution?
NP-Complete
Projected Satisfiability (ƎSAT)
Does ∃𝑌. 𝜑 have a solution?
NP-Complete
≤
[Toda, 91]
=
[Zawadzki et al, 13]
Unless PH
collapses
<
𝜑 is a CNF formula, 𝑌 ⊆ Vars(𝜑)
+++
Background: Projected Model Counting
Example:
4
Problem: Projected Model Counting
Input: A CNF formula 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌) over disjoint variable sets 𝑋 and 𝑌
Output: #𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌)
The number of 𝒙 ∈ 2
𝑋 s.t. there exists 𝒚 ∈ 2
𝑌 where 𝜑 𝒙, 𝒚 = 1
𝑋 = {𝑥1, 𝑥2}
𝑌 = {𝑦1, 𝑦2}
𝜑 𝑋, 𝑌 = (𝑥1 ∨ ¬𝑥2 ∨ 𝑦1) ∧ (𝑥1 ∨ 𝑦2) ∧ (¬𝑦1 ∨ ¬𝑦2)
Solutions to ∃𝑌.𝜑 are: (𝑥1 = 0, 𝑥2 = 0), (𝑥1 = 1, 𝑥2 = 0), and (𝑥1 = 1, 𝑥2 = 1)
Thus #𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑 𝑋, 𝑌 = 3
Everything in this work
generalizes to literal-weighted
projected model counting.
Background: Projected Model Counting
Techniques for exact projected model counting:
1. Search: Reason directly about 𝜑 using a SAT solver
• projMC [Lagniez & Marquis, 19], reSSAT [Lee et al., 17]
2. Knowledge Compilation: Compile 𝜑 to a representation where counting is easy
• D4P [Lagniez & Marquis, 19]
3. Dynamic Programming: Reason about the clause structure of 𝜑
• nestHDB [Hecher et al., 20]
• This work
5
Problem: Projected Model Counting
Input: A CNF formula 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌) over disjoint variable sets 𝑋 and 𝑌
Output: #𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌)
The number of 𝒙 ∈ 2
𝑋 s.t. there exists 𝒚 ∈ 2
𝑌 where 𝜑 𝒙, 𝒚 = 1
There is also approximate
projected model counting,
but we focus on exact.
DPMC: Model Counting Algorithm
6
𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1 ¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2 ¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3
Definition: A project-join tree for 𝜑 is a tree where
1. Each clause of 𝜑 is assigned a (unique) leaf node.
2. Each variable of 𝜑 is assigned an internal node.
3. For all clauses 𝐶 and variables 𝑧 that appear in 𝐶,
the 𝑧 node is an ancestor of the 𝐶 node.
{𝑦1}
{𝑦4}
{𝑥3}
{𝑥2}
{𝑦2, 𝑦3}
{𝑥1}
1. Planning: Build a project-join tree of 𝜑(𝑋).
2. Execution: Process project-join tree from leaves up to compute #𝑋 𝜑(𝑋).
[Dudek et. al, 20]
¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2 𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
Our Algorithm for Projected Model Counting
7
𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1 ¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2 ¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3
Definition: A project-join tree for 𝜑 is a tree where
1. Each clause of 𝜑 is assigned a (unique) leaf node.
2. Each variable of 𝜑 is assigned an internal node.
3. For all clauses 𝐶 and variables 𝑧 that appear in 𝐶,
the 𝑧 node is an ancestor of the 𝐶 node.
Definition: A project-join tree is (𝑿,𝒀)-graded if:
4. For all variables 𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 and 𝑦 ∈ 𝑌,
the 𝑦 node is not an ancestor of the 𝑥 node.
{𝑦1}
{𝑦4}
{𝑥3}
{𝑥2}
{𝑦2, 𝑦3}
{𝑥1}
1. Planning: Build an (𝑿,𝒀)-graded project-join tree of 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌).
2. Execution: Process graded project-join tree from leaves up to compute #𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌).
¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2 𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
2. Execution
8
𝑦1 𝑥1
0 0 1
0 1 1
1 0 0
1 1 1
An Algebraic Decision Diagram (ADD)
represents a function 2
𝐴 → ℝ as
a (sparse) directed acyclic graph.
𝑦1
𝑥1
1 0
𝑥2
𝑥3
2 1
𝑦1
1.5
𝑦1
Idea:
Pass ADDs through tree from leaves to root,
projecting away variables according to the labels.
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1 𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2 ¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3 ¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2 𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
{𝑦1}
{𝑦4}
{𝑥3}
{𝑥2}
{𝑦2, 𝑦3}
{𝑥1}
2. Execution: Running Time
9
Key performance measure:
• Width of the project-join tree
• I.e., the maximum number of variables
needed for a single ADD
• Width can be computed upfront
Theorem: Given:
• A CNF formula 𝜑 𝑋, 𝑌
• An (𝑋,𝑌)-graded project-join tree of 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌) of width 𝑤
This procedure computes #𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑(𝑋, 𝑌) in time 𝑂(2
𝑤 ⋅ poly 𝜑 ).
Projected counting
(parameterized by width)
with ungraded project-join trees
is Ω 2
2
𝑤
assuming ETH
[Fichte et al., 18]
Idea:
Pass ADDs through tree from leaves to root,
projecting away variables according to the labels.
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1 𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2 ¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3 ¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2 𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
{𝑦1}
{𝑦4}
{𝑥3}
{𝑥2}
{𝑦2, 𝑦3}
{𝑥1}
1. Planning (Model Counting)
10
How to find a low-width project-join tree of 𝜑?
Tree Decomposition
of 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥(𝝋)
Project-Join Tree of 𝝋
Decompositions show a “good” way to reason about a graph.
Black-box, heuristic tree-decomposition solvers:
• FlowCutter
• Tamaki
• htd
width 𝑤 treewidth 𝑤 + 1
poly. time
[McMahan et al., 04]
[Kask et al., 05]
[Markov and Shi, 05]
[Hamann and Strasser, 18]
[Tamaki, 17]
[Abseher et al., 17]
1. Planning (Projected Model Counting)
11
How to find a low-width (𝑿,𝒀)-graded project-join tree of 𝜑?
Possible Approach? Modify tree decomposition tools to take into account different variable types.
Better Idea: Use previous planners as a black box.
Add “virtual” clauses to 𝜑 to construct a new formula 𝛼 so that:
Tree Decomposition
of 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥(𝜶)
(𝑿,𝒀)-graded Project-Join Tree of 𝜶
Project-Join Tree of 𝝋
Theorem 6 ←
Theorem 7 →
poly. time
width 𝑤 width 𝑤 treewidth 𝑤 + 1
1. Planning: The Reduction
12
Constructing 𝛼:
1. Build the primal graph of 𝜑
A vertex for every variable, and an edge if two variables appear together in a clause.
2. Examine the connected components of 𝑌 variables in the primal graph
3. For each connected component, add a “virtual clause” of the adjacent 𝑋 variables to 𝛼.
Example:
𝜑 =
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1
𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2
¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3
¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2
𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
𝑥1
𝑥3
𝑥2
𝑦1
𝑦2 𝑦3
𝑦4
1. Planning: The Reduction
13
Constructing 𝛼:
1. Build the primal graph of 𝜑
A vertex for every variable, and an edge if two variables appear together in a clause.
2. Examine the connected components of 𝑌 variables in the primal graph
3. For each connected component, add a “virtual clause” of the adjacent 𝑋 variables to 𝛼.
Example:
𝜑 =
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1
𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2
¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3
¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2
𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
𝑥1
𝑥3
𝑥2
𝑦1
𝑦2 𝑦3
𝑦4
1. Planning: The Reduction
14
Constructing 𝛼:
1. Build the primal graph of 𝜑
A vertex for every variable, and an edge if two variables appear together in a clause.
2. Examine the connected components of 𝑌 variables in the primal graph
3. For each connected component, add a “virtual clause” of the adjacent 𝑋 variables to 𝛼.
Example:
𝜑 =
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1
𝑦1 ∨ 𝑦2 ∨ 𝑥2
¬𝑦2 ∨ 𝑦3
¬𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥2
𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
𝑥1
𝑥3
𝑥2
𝑦1
𝑦2 𝑦3
𝑦4
𝛼 =
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
¬𝑦1 ∨ 𝑥1
…
𝑦4 ∨ 𝑥3
𝒙𝟏 ∨ 𝒙𝟐
𝒙𝟐 ∨ 𝒙𝟑
Algorithm Overview: ProCount
15
Boolean Formula 𝜶(𝑿, 𝒀)
ProCount: Implemented in C++
https://github.com/vardigroup/DPMC
Planning: Black box tree-decomposition solvers
• FlowCutter, Tamaki, htd
Execution: ADDs with CUDD
Tree Decomposition
of 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐥(𝜶)
Project-Join Tree of 𝜶 (𝑿,𝒀)-graded
Project-Join Tree of 𝝋
Execution with ADDs
#𝑋∃𝑌 𝜑(
+++
Summary and Future Work
I PBP is a more expressive alternative to WMC that works with
state-of-the-art WMC algorithms based on pseudo-Boolean
function manipulation.
I Many WMC encodings can be efficiently transformed into
PBP while removing unnecessary variables and clauses.
I The identified conditions for this transformation to work help
explain how WMC encodings for Bayesian networks operate.
I Performance improvements depend on the encoding.
I The very first encoding was virtually unaffected,
I whereas the state-of-the-art encoding was significantly
improved.
I Can the identified conditions be generalised further?
I Can the transformation be applied to WMC encodings for
other application domains?
+++
Simplify setup
+++
An improved parameterized algorithm for SAT running in
O∗(1.0646L), where L is length of the input CNF-formula.
bob has a sat certificate size o(m/2) on n variables in time times degree of n
only the hard color C is interesting for degree d that is c3d5n180s and c4d9n100s
bob has a sat certificate size o(m/2 + n) (in time d times n) === mdn/2 + ndn == ((m/2) + (n ([squares [(of)] size]) dn))
bob has a sat certificate size o(m/2) on n variables in time times degree of n
bob has a sat certificate size (m/2)
+++
Winner of the DQBF track of QBF Evaluation 2020
okay okay okay i challenge total count valid qbfs of the given P formula
Carlos Ansótegui my bob versus this monotone galactic cluster
+++
Beyond Computation: The P versus NP question (panel discussion)
Aug. 2014
Richard Karp, moderator, UC Berkeley
Ron Fagin, IBM Almaden
Russell Impagliazzo, UC San Diego
Sandy Irani, UC Irvine
Christos Papadimitriou, UC Berkeley
Omer Reingold, Microsoft Research
Michael Sipser, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Ryan Williams, Stanford University
dear comp dot theory
monotone reason is linearly decidable
i agree deciders are important to clean running systems so
before discussing the details of bob try this...
i call bobs one line theoretical decider /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g);*/
i place the decider of the pspace solver on line four of bob source code
with the davis putnam code further along in the one thousand lines of
bob source code with the decider being called last with Lessone(depth)
typedef unsigned long num;
const num one = (num)true; /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g)*/
const num zero = one >> one; /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g)*/
num Lessone(num g){num p = zero; for(p=zero; (p+one)<g; p=((p+g)>>one)) { /*theObserverSystemCore(p,g);*/ } return p;}
...
joy env::epluribusunum(Bob* b, Goods& sets, bignum& r)//why simple is good
{ passionmustdepth++;
when((passionmustretros++ & tautologies[ten + siv]) == zero) when(two < studylevel) { prin("%u", passionmustdepth); }
while(eon()&&(*b).manyp()){Bob* lobub=b;num a=Bob::unity((*lobub).t_r_e_e,(*lobub).wyde());
num be=syze();assume(lobub,a);dollar(be,r,b);when(qlog&&eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);
when(eon()){epluribusunum(b,sets,r);}
unassume(lobub,a,be,b);dollar(be,r,b);
when(qlog){when(satisfiablenumber&&r.n.size()){passionmustdepth=Lessone(passionmustdepth);return;}
when(eon()&&(*b).onep())chooseb(sets,b);}}
when(eon()){when(onemodelp())addsolution(r);otherwise composition(sets,r);}
passionmustdepth = Lessone( passionmustdepth ); }
num theObserverSystemCore(num p, num g)
{
when (g > 21) haltbob();// trivial beginning
}
go ben go ben go ben
(Expecting a direct answer to any of these questions is the triumph of
hope over experience.)
So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
"We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
problem"
or
"This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
non-halting computations and a few more."
It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
Is it comfy?
yes i am fine ben
one stability pill per day
daniel (little d)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 22:59 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <87o8bb173g.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #35979 |
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> On 7/9/2021 6:30 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/8/2021 8:48 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>
>>>> So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
>>>>
>>>> "We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
>>>> problem"
>>>> or
>>>> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
>>>> non-halting computations and a few more."
>>>>
>>>> It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
>>>> Is it comfy?
>>>>
>>> The first one.
>> Thank you. Your directness make me hopeful that you'll be clear about
>> some other things... How long have you though that "and a few more" was
>> correct? I.e. how long have you been arguing for a position you now
>> concede is mistaken? Months? Years? Decades?
>
> I have only been trying to specifically define the set that are
> involved for a few days.
I wrote something about this but deleted it since it turns out, further
down, you are still sitting on the fence.
>> You have refused to accept the definition of the halting problem for
>> decades. Do you now accept that every string has a correct yes/no
>> answer as far as halting is concerned, and that "yes" is the correct
>> answer for those strings that represent halting computations and "no" is
>> the correct answer for all the others?
>
> The question: What Boolean value can H return to P representing the
> correct halt status of P(P) in this computation has no correct answer:
You seem to think that because every H gets at least one case wrong (the
one designed to confound it) that this means that there is no correct
answer to every halting instance. That is wrong, and until you realise
that, you are not going to make any progress.
For any two-argument Boolean function H, there is a corresponding
function hat(H). The computation hat(H)(hat(H)) either halts or it does
not, so that computation has a correct answer as to its halting. The
fact that no H gives the right answer for its own personal Nemesis,
hat(H)(hat(H)), does not mean there isn't one in every single case.
We even know what it is for your H (despite the fact that you a
studiously hiding the code), because you have stated, and posted a trace
showing, what actually happens! P (your current name for the 'hat'
version of H) halts when passed P. This is why H(P,P) == 0 is wrong.
> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
> void P(u32 x)
> {
> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
> if (Input_Halts)
> HERE: goto HERE;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
> u32 Input_Halts = H((u32)P, (u32)P);
> Output("Input_Halts = ", Input_Halts);
> }
>
> You always consistently twist these words to say something else
> entirely knowing full well that you twist these words.
You are correctly explaining that H is wrong about P(P). How can it be
put any more simply? How is that twisting your words? Surely you don't
deny that, since P(P) halts, there is a correct answer as to whether
P(P) halts or not?
The halting problem is about deciding if a computation -- some code and
some input -- halts or not. For a halt decider, H, to be correct
H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
In particular, the facts that H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) halts (facts you
don't deny) show that H is not a halt decider. I know you never claimed
it was (except by accident), but you do claim it is right about P(P).
It is not.
I think you consider my refusal to anthropomorphise code as "twisting
your words". If you rephrased it in terms of the programmer, I'd just
agree. Given bool H(code P, data I) {...}, what code can a programmer
write in the brackets so that H(P,P) is correct? Answer: none. There
is no code that can "get round" the construction of P from H.
>> And since we now know that your "halt deciding criteria is the same as
>> the halting problem" we can ditch all the waffle about simulation. It's
>> just halting as conventionally defined.
> No we cannot.
Nonsense. Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more" was
wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when P(I) does
not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
If your waffle "halting" definition is the same as halting, there would
be no need for it at all. Your apparently clear answer above ("the
first one") is either a lie or the result of some deep self-deception on
your part.
> In order to remove the pathological feedback loop such that P does the
> opposite of whatever H decides H simply acts as a pure simulator of P
> thus having no effect what-so-ever on the behavior of P until after
> its halt status decision has been made.
>
> H then aborts its simulation of P before ever returning any value to P
> because every function called in infinite recursion or infinitely
> nested simulation never returns to this caller.
P(P) halts. H(P,P) == 0 is wrong when P(P) halts. Whatever all your
guff really means, it is not the same as halting. You are not
addressing the halting problem.
>> Your favourite book, and your favourite quoted lines from it, make it
>> quite clear that halting computations like P(P) need to be accepted not
>> rejected. P(P) halts, but H(P,P) == 0 which is wrong. So what have you
>> now after all this time except a huge mistake?
>
> Because the pure simulation of P(P) never halts this proves that P(P)
> meets the conventional definition of a computation that never halts.
P(P) halts. It does not meet the conventional definition of a
computation that never halts. Your words are nonsense of the first
order.
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 17:29 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <pq2dnZox5YgiUHX9nZ2dnUU7-YHNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36001 |
On 7/9/2021 4:59 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 7/9/2021 6:30 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 7/8/2021 8:48 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
>>>>>
>>>>> "We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
>>>>> problem"
>>>>> or
>>>>> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
>>>>> non-halting computations and a few more."
>>>>>
>>>>> It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
>>>>> Is it comfy?
>>>>>
>>>> The first one.
>>> Thank you. Your directness make me hopeful that you'll be clear about
>>> some other things... How long have you though that "and a few more" was
>>> correct? I.e. how long have you been arguing for a position you now
>>> concede is mistaken? Months? Years? Decades?
>>
>> I have only been trying to specifically define the set that are
>> involved for a few days.
>
> I wrote something about this but deleted it since it turns out, further
> down, you are still sitting on the fence.
>
>>> You have refused to accept the definition of the halting problem for
>>> decades. Do you now accept that every string has a correct yes/no
>>> answer as far as halting is concerned, and that "yes" is the correct
>>> answer for those strings that represent halting computations and "no" is
>>> the correct answer for all the others?
>>
>> The question: What Boolean value can H return to P representing the
>> correct halt status of P(P) in this computation has no correct answer:
>
> You seem to think that because every H gets at least one case wrong (the
> one designed to confound it) that this means that there is no correct
> answer to every halting instance. That is wrong, and until you realise
> that, you are not going to make any progress.
>
> For any two-argument Boolean function H, there is a corresponding
> function hat(H). The computation hat(H)(hat(H)) either halts or it does
> not, so that computation has a correct answer as to its halting. The
> fact that no H gives the right answer for its own personal Nemesis,
> hat(H)(hat(H)), does not mean there isn't one in every single case.
>
> We even know what it is for your H (despite the fact that you a
> studiously hiding the code), because you have stated, and posted a trace
> showing, what actually happens! P (your current name for the 'hat'
> version of H) halts when passed P. This is why H(P,P) == 0 is wrong.
>
>> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
>> void P(u32 x)
>> {
>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>> if (Input_Halts)
>> HERE: goto HERE;
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> u32 Input_Halts = H((u32)P, (u32)P);
>> Output("Input_Halts = ", Input_Halts);
>> }
>>
>> You always consistently twist these words to say something else
>> entirely knowing full well that you twist these words.
>
> You are correctly explaining that H is wrong about P(P). How can it be
> put any more simply?
The reason that H cannot return the correct halt status to P is that
this TM / input pair was intentionally modeled on the basis of the liar
paradox.
The liar paradox is not a truth bearer because it is self-contradictory.
Any expression of formal or natural language that is not a truth bearer
has no associated Boolean value.
The halting problem counter-example (prior to my insights) had no
associated Boolean value specifically because most of the details are
always unspecified.
When we ask the specific question: What correct value of {true, false}
can H correctly return to P that indicates the actual halt status of P?
(The answer is restricted to Boolean, the answer of "neither" is not
allowed).
This 100% specific question <is> as I have always said exactly the same
type mismatch error as asking the question: What time is it (yes or no)?
> How is that twisting your words? Surely you don't
> deny that, since P(P) halts, there is a correct answer as to whether
> P(P) halts or not?
>
> The halting problem is about deciding if a computation -- some code and
> some input -- halts or not. For a halt decider, H, to be correct
>
> H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
> H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
>
> In particular, the facts that H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) halts (facts you
> don't deny) show that H is not a halt decider. I know you never claimed
> it was (except by accident), but you do claim it is right about P(P).
> It is not.
>
> I think you consider my refusal to anthropomorphise code as "twisting
> your words". If you rephrased it in terms of the programmer, I'd just
> agree. Given bool H(code P, data I) {...}, what code can a programmer
> write in the brackets so that H(P,P) is correct? Answer: none. There
> is no code that can "get round" the construction of P from H.
>
>>> And since we now know that your "halt deciding criteria is the same as
>>> the halting problem" we can ditch all the waffle about simulation. It's
>>> just halting as conventionally defined.
>
>> No we cannot.
>
> Nonsense. Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more" was
> wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when P(I) does
> not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
>
int main() { P(P); } does not count as halting even though its stops
running in the same way that Infinite_loop() does not count as halting
when the simulator aborts its simulation.
When H simply simulates its input and never interferes with the behavior
of its input H can screen out its own address range from the execution
trace that it examines as the basis for its halt status decision.
The set of halting computations halt on their own without interference.
The set of not halting computations do not halt on their own without
interference.
> If your waffle "halting" definition is the same as halting, there would
> be no need for it at all. Your apparently clear answer above ("the
> first one") is either a lie or the result of some deep self-deception on
> your part.
>
>> In order to remove the pathological feedback loop such that P does the
>> opposite of whatever H decides H simply acts as a pure simulator of P
>> thus having no effect what-so-ever on the behavior of P until after
>> its halt status decision has been made.
>>
>> H then aborts its simulation of P before ever returning any value to P
>> because every function called in infinite recursion or infinitely
>> nested simulation never returns to this caller.
>
> P(P) halts. H(P,P) == 0 is wrong when P(P) halts. Whatever all your
> guff really means, it is not the same as halting. You are not
> addressing the halting problem.
>
>>> Your favourite book, and your favourite quoted lines from it, make it
>>> quite clear that halting computations like P(P) need to be accepted not
>>> rejected. P(P) halts, but H(P,P) == 0 which is wrong. So what have you
>>> now after all this time except a huge mistake?
>>
>> Because the pure simulation of P(P) never halts this proves that P(P)
>> meets the conventional definition of a computation that never halts.
>
> P(P) halts. It does not meet the conventional definition of a
> computation that never halts. Your words are nonsense of the first
> order.
>
--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 00:23 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <877dhz138a.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #36004 |
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
Please stop putting back irrelevant groups. You are not a tom cat.
There is not need to spray everywhere.
> On 7/9/2021 4:59 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/9/2021 6:30 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/8/2021 8:48 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
>>>>>> problem"
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
>>>>>> non-halting computations and a few more."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
>>>>>> Is it comfy?
>>>>>>
>>>>> The first one.
>>>> Thank you. Your directness make me hopeful that you'll be clear about
>>>> some other things... How long have you though that "and a few more" was
>>>> correct? I.e. how long have you been arguing for a position you now
>>>> concede is mistaken? Months? Years? Decades?
>>>
>>> I have only been trying to specifically define the set that are
>>> involved for a few days.
>> I wrote something about this but deleted it since it turns out, further
>> down, you are still sitting on the fence.
>>
>>>> You have refused to accept the definition of the halting problem for
>>>> decades. Do you now accept that every string has a correct yes/no
>>>> answer as far as halting is concerned, and that "yes" is the correct
>>>> answer for those strings that represent halting computations and "no" is
>>>> the correct answer for all the others?
>>>
>>> The question: What Boolean value can H return to P representing the
>>> correct halt status of P(P) in this computation has no correct answer:
>> You seem to think that because every H gets at least one case wrong (the
>> one designed to confound it) that this means that there is no correct
>> answer to every halting instance. That is wrong, and until you realise
>> that, you are not going to make any progress.
>> For any two-argument Boolean function H, there is a corresponding
>> function hat(H). The computation hat(H)(hat(H)) either halts or it does
>> not, so that computation has a correct answer as to its halting. The
>> fact that no H gives the right answer for its own personal Nemesis,
>> hat(H)(hat(H)), does not mean there isn't one in every single case.
>> We even know what it is for your H (despite the fact that you a
>> studiously hiding the code), because you have stated, and posted a trace
>> showing, what actually happens! P (your current name for the 'hat'
>> version of H) halts when passed P. This is why H(P,P) == 0 is wrong.
>>
>>> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
>>> void P(u32 x)
>>> {
>>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>>> if (Input_Halts)
>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> u32 Input_Halts = H((u32)P, (u32)P);
>>> Output("Input_Halts = ", Input_Halts);
>>> }
>>>
>>> You always consistently twist these words to say something else
>>> entirely knowing full well that you twist these words.
>> You are correctly explaining that H is wrong about P(P). How can it be
>> put any more simply?
>
> The reason that H cannot return the correct halt status to P is that
> this TM / input pair was intentionally modeled on the basis of the
> liar paradox.
At least you agree, then that H(P,P) is wrong since P(P) halts. Good.
> The halting problem counter-example (prior to my insights) had no
> associated Boolean value specifically because most of the details are
> always unspecified.
Flat-out wrong. P(P) halts. The correct associated Boolean value is
true. If you write some other H', the resulting hat(H')(hat(H'))
computation might not halt so the correct associated Boolean value would
be false. There is always a correct associated Boolean value describing
the halting of every computation, despite the fact that there is no
function that gets the corresponding 'hat' case right.
> When we ask the specific question: What correct value of {true, false}
> can H correctly return to P that indicates the actual halt status of
> P?
>
> (The answer is restricted to Boolean, the answer of "neither" is not allowed).
>
> This 100% specific question <is> as I have always said exactly the
> same type mismatch error as asking the question: What time is it (yes
> or no)?
But your 100% specific question is not an instance of the halting
problem. It's a related question about what is possible in code, and we
know the answer -- no code can decide halting. It's odd that your
defence includes such a robust argument that the halting theorem is
correct.
That every bit of code, no matter how simple or how subtle, is wrong
about some inputs is just a statement of the halting theorem. That all
inputs have a correct yes/no answer is just a statement of fact.
>> How is that twisting your words? Surely you don't
>> deny that, since P(P) halts, there is a correct answer as to whether
>> P(P) halts or not?
>> The halting problem is about deciding if a computation -- some code and
>> some input -- halts or not. For a halt decider, H, to be correct
>> H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
>> H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
>> In particular, the facts that H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) halts (facts you
>> don't deny) show that H is not a halt decider. I know you never claimed
>> it was (except by accident), but you do claim it is right about P(P).
>> It is not.
>> I think you consider my refusal to anthropomorphise code as "twisting
>> your words". If you rephrased it in terms of the programmer, I'd just
>> agree. Given bool H(code P, data I) {...}, what code can a programmer
>> write in the brackets so that H(P,P) is correct? Answer: none. There
>> is no code that can "get round" the construction of P from H.
>>
>>>> And since we now know that your "halt deciding criteria is the same as
>>>> the halting problem" we can ditch all the waffle about simulation. It's
>>>> just halting as conventionally defined.
>>
>>> No we cannot.
>> Nonsense. Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more"
>> was wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when
>> P(I) does not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
>
> int main() { P(P); } does not count as halting even though its stops
> running in the same way that Infinite_loop() does not count as halting
> when the simulator aborts its simulation.
P(P) halts. If you don't "count" all halting computations as halting
you are talking nonsense.
Remember, you have relinquished your right to make up a definition of
what halting is. You've been clear that you intend "halting" to refer
to the conventional meaning of the term as used in the halting problem.
If you are unsure about what counts, you need to ask experts what counts
as halting. And when people like me tell you what counts, you have to
suck it up. Halting is not a mysterious concept.
> When H simply simulates its input and never interferes with the
> behavior of its input H can screen out its own address range from the
> execution trace that it examines as the basis for its halt status
> decision.
>
> The set of halting computations halt on their own without interference.
>
> The set of not halting computations do not halt on their own without
> interference.
None of this matters. You've agreed that halting means what everyone
else means by it. A function H is only correct about the halting of its
arguments when
H(P,I) != 0 iff P(I) halts, or
H(P,I) == 0 iff P(I) does not halt.
You have to choose: you are talking about the halting problem, in which
case the above applies and your H is wrong, or you are not talking about
the halting problem and we can ignore you.
>>> Because the pure simulation of P(P) never halts this proves that P(P)
>>> meets the conventional definition of a computation that never halts.
>>
>> P(P) halts. It does not meet the conventional definition of a
>> computation that never halts. Your words are nonsense of the first
>> order.
I often skip over things you don't address, but this one is stunning.
You say something that is total garbage but then just ignore it when
it's pointed out.
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 18:31 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <u7KdnXl1aJP0QXX9nZ2dnUU7-RHNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36007 |
On 7/9/2021 6:23 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
> Please stop putting back irrelevant groups. You are not a tom cat.
> There is not need to spray everywhere.
>
>> On 7/9/2021 4:59 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 7/9/2021 6:30 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/8/2021 8:48 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> So which of your statements is the one you want to stand by?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting
>>>>>>> problem"
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
>>>>>>> non-halting computations and a few more."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It should be obvious to others why this is the fence you are sitting on.
>>>>>>> Is it comfy?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first one.
>>>>> Thank you. Your directness make me hopeful that you'll be clear about
>>>>> some other things... How long have you though that "and a few more" was
>>>>> correct? I.e. how long have you been arguing for a position you now
>>>>> concede is mistaken? Months? Years? Decades?
>>>>
>>>> I have only been trying to specifically define the set that are
>>>> involved for a few days.
>>> I wrote something about this but deleted it since it turns out, further
>>> down, you are still sitting on the fence.
>>>
>>>>> You have refused to accept the definition of the halting problem for
>>>>> decades. Do you now accept that every string has a correct yes/no
>>>>> answer as far as halting is concerned, and that "yes" is the correct
>>>>> answer for those strings that represent halting computations and "no" is
>>>>> the correct answer for all the others?
>>>>
>>>> The question: What Boolean value can H return to P representing the
>>>> correct halt status of P(P) in this computation has no correct answer:
>>> You seem to think that because every H gets at least one case wrong (the
>>> one designed to confound it) that this means that there is no correct
>>> answer to every halting instance. That is wrong, and until you realise
>>> that, you are not going to make any progress.
>>> For any two-argument Boolean function H, there is a corresponding
>>> function hat(H). The computation hat(H)(hat(H)) either halts or it does
>>> not, so that computation has a correct answer as to its halting. The
>>> fact that no H gives the right answer for its own personal Nemesis,
>>> hat(H)(hat(H)), does not mean there isn't one in every single case.
>>> We even know what it is for your H (despite the fact that you a
>>> studiously hiding the code), because you have stated, and posted a trace
>>> showing, what actually happens! P (your current name for the 'hat'
>>> version of H) halts when passed P. This is why H(P,P) == 0 is wrong.
>>>
>>>> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
>>>> void P(u32 x)
>>>> {
>>>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>>>> if (Input_Halts)
>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>> u32 Input_Halts = H((u32)P, (u32)P);
>>>> Output("Input_Halts = ", Input_Halts);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> You always consistently twist these words to say something else
>>>> entirely knowing full well that you twist these words.
>>> You are correctly explaining that H is wrong about P(P). How can it be
>>> put any more simply?
>>
>> The reason that H cannot return the correct halt status to P is that
>> this TM / input pair was intentionally modeled on the basis of the
>> liar paradox.
>
> At least you agree, then that H(P,P) is wrong since P(P) halts. Good.
>
>> The halting problem counter-example (prior to my insights) had no
>> associated Boolean value specifically because most of the details are
>> always unspecified.
>
> Flat-out wrong. P(P) halts. The correct associated Boolean value is
> true. If you write some other H', the resulting hat(H')(hat(H'))
> computation might not halt so the correct associated Boolean value would
> be false. There is always a correct associated Boolean value describing
> the halting of every computation, despite the fact that there is no
> function that gets the corresponding 'hat' case right.
>
>> When we ask the specific question: What correct value of {true, false}
>> can H correctly return to P that indicates the actual halt status of
>> P?
>>
>> (The answer is restricted to Boolean, the answer of "neither" is not allowed).
>>
>> This 100% specific question <is> as I have always said exactly the
>> same type mismatch error as asking the question: What time is it (yes
>> or no)?
>
> But your 100% specific question is not an instance of the halting
> problem. It's a related question about what is possible in code, and we
> know the answer -- no code can decide halting. It's odd that your
> defence includes such a robust argument that the halting theorem is
> correct.
>
> That every bit of code, no matter how simple or how subtle, is wrong
> about some inputs is just a statement of the halting theorem. That all
> inputs have a correct yes/no answer is just a statement of fact.
>
>>> How is that twisting your words? Surely you don't
>>> deny that, since P(P) halts, there is a correct answer as to whether
>>> P(P) halts or not?
>>> The halting problem is about deciding if a computation -- some code and
>>> some input -- halts or not. For a halt decider, H, to be correct
>>> H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
>>> H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
>>> In particular, the facts that H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) halts (facts you
>>> don't deny) show that H is not a halt decider. I know you never claimed
>>> it was (except by accident), but you do claim it is right about P(P).
>>> It is not.
>>> I think you consider my refusal to anthropomorphise code as "twisting
>>> your words". If you rephrased it in terms of the programmer, I'd just
>>> agree. Given bool H(code P, data I) {...}, what code can a programmer
>>> write in the brackets so that H(P,P) is correct? Answer: none. There
>>> is no code that can "get round" the construction of P from H.
>>>
>>>>> And since we now know that your "halt deciding criteria is the same as
>>>>> the halting problem" we can ditch all the waffle about simulation. It's
>>>>> just halting as conventionally defined.
>>>
>>>> No we cannot.
>>> Nonsense. Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more"
>>> was wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when
>>> P(I) does not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
>>
>> int main() { P(P); } does not count as halting even though its stops
>> running in the same way that Infinite_loop() does not count as halting
>> when the simulator aborts its simulation.
>
> P(P) halts. If you don't "count" all halting computations as halting
> you are talking nonsense.
>
A computation that stops running because it has been aborted is as
Richard put it suspended, and not halted.
> Remember, you have relinquished your right to make up a definition of
> what halting is. You've been clear that you intend "halting" to refer
> to the conventional meaning of the term as used in the halting problem.
> If you are unsure about what counts, you need to ask experts what counts
> as halting. And when people like me tell you what counts, you have to
> suck it up. Halting is not a mysterious concept.
>
When-so-ever the pure simulation of an input on its input never halts
then this input never halts.
When-so-ever any input to H never halts while H remains a pure simulator
then we know this input never halts.
int main() { P(P); } never halts while H remains a pure simulator.
--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-10 01:13 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <87k0lzyqjk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #36008 |
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> On 7/9/2021 6:23 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>> Please stop putting back irrelevant groups. You are not a tom cat.
>> There is not need to spray everywhere.
Please take note. There is no need to be rude as well as wrong.
>>> On 7/9/2021 4:59 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> ... Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more"
>>>> was wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when
>>>> P(I) does not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
>>>
>>> int main() { P(P); } does not count as halting even though its stops
>>> running in the same way that Infinite_loop() does not count as halting
>>> when the simulator aborts its simulation.
>>
>> P(P) halts. If you don't "count" all halting computations as halting
>> you are talking nonsense.
>
> A computation that stops running because it has been aborted is as
> Richard put it suspended, and not halted.
I see you don't want to discuss any of the above so I've cut it all and
I'll keep my replies short. No point in writing explanations just for
you to ignore.
P(P) halts. It counts. You don't get to say that some halting does not
count (until you go back to admitting that you are not talking about the
halting problem when you can make up any old dross you like).
>> Remember, you have relinquished your right to make up a definition of
>> what halting is. You've been clear that you intend "halting" to refer
>> to the conventional meaning of the term as used in the halting problem.
>> If you are unsure about what counts, you need to ask experts what counts
>> as halting. And when people like me tell you what counts, you have to
>> suck it up. Halting is not a mysterious concept.
>
> When-so-ever the pure simulation of an input on its input never halts
> then this input never halts.
>
> When-so-ever any input to H never halts while H remains a pure
> simulator then we know this input never halts.
You have stated your intention that whatever waffle you write about
simulation, you intend it to capture exactly the same meaning as
conventional halting. Until you go back to being honest, and admit you
are not talking about the halting problem as the world understands it, I
can safely ignore all of your clumsy attempts at a definition because
they are supposed to mean what everyone else means by halting.
> int main() { P(P); } never halts while H remains a pure simulator.
For some H to be correct
H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
If H is a pure simulator it will not meet this specification. But your
H is not a pure simulator. It is simply wrong about P(P). It is wrong
based in fact you have reported: that H(P,P) == 0 and that P(P) halts.
Whatever H you come up with, it will be wrong about some inputs. That's
what an impossible program is.
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 19:33 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <EKmdnQbwBf5Yd3X9nZ2dnUU7-QPNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36009 |
On 7/9/2021 7:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 7/9/2021 6:23 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>>> Please stop putting back irrelevant groups. You are not a tom cat.
>>> There is not need to spray everywhere.
>
> Please take note. There is no need to be rude as well as wrong.
>
>>>> On 7/9/2021 4:59 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>
>>>>> ... Despite apparently being clear that your "and a few more"
>>>>> was wrong, you are sticking by it. H(P,I) == 0 is "correct" when
>>>>> P(I) does not halt, and for a few more cases (like P(P) which halts).
>>>>
>>>> int main() { P(P); } does not count as halting even though its stops
>>>> running in the same way that Infinite_loop() does not count as halting
>>>> when the simulator aborts its simulation.
>>>
>>> P(P) halts. If you don't "count" all halting computations as halting
>>> you are talking nonsense.
>>
>> A computation that stops running because it has been aborted is as
>> Richard put it suspended, and not halted.
>
> I see you don't want to discuss any of the above so I've cut it all and
> I'll keep my replies short. No point in writing explanations just for
> you to ignore.
>
> P(P) halts. It counts. You don't get to say that some halting does not
> count (until you go back to admitting that you are not talking about the
> halting problem when you can make up any old dross you like).
>
>>> Remember, you have relinquished your right to make up a definition of
>>> what halting is. You've been clear that you intend "halting" to refer
>>> to the conventional meaning of the term as used in the halting problem.
>>> If you are unsure about what counts, you need to ask experts what counts
>>> as halting. And when people like me tell you what counts, you have to
>>> suck it up. Halting is not a mysterious concept.
>>
>> When-so-ever the pure simulation of an input on its input never halts
>> then this input never halts.
>>
>> When-so-ever any input to H never halts while H remains a pure
>> simulator then we know this input never halts.
>
> You have stated your intention that whatever waffle you write about
> simulation, you intend it to capture exactly the same meaning as
> conventional halting. Until you go back to being honest, and admit you
> are not talking about the halting problem as the world understands it, I
> can safely ignore all of your clumsy attempts at a definition because
> they are supposed to mean what everyone else means by halting.
>
>> int main() { P(P); } never halts while H remains a pure simulator.
>
> For some H to be correct
>
> H(P,I) != 0 if and only if P(I) halts and
> H(P,I) != 1 if and only if P(I) does not halt.
>
> If H is a pure simulator it will not meet this specification. But your
> H is not a pure simulator. It is simply wrong about P(P). It is wrong
> based in fact you have reported: that H(P,P) == 0 and that P(P) halts.
> Whatever H you come up with, it will be wrong about some inputs. That's
> what an impossible program is.
>
Simulating halt decider H is only answering the question:
Would the input halt on its input if H never stopped simulating it?
An answer of "no" universally means that the input never halts.
An answer of "yes" universally means that the input halts.
[Halt Deciding Axiom] When the pure simulation of the machine
description ⟨P⟩ of a machine P on its input I never halts we know that
P(I) never halts.
--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.theory
csiph-web