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 10 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 17 Next page →
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-17 18:43 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) |
| Message-ID | <78956180-6fd3-4dc7-a0e2-4502f196c485n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36572 |
On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 9:27:57 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
> > On 7/16/2021 7:43 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> On 7/15/2021 9:09 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 7/15/2021 7:17 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 7/15/2021 3:04 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 7/15/2021 3:44 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, 15 July 2021 at 04:12:32 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/14/2021 9:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> When you provide the context of a TM/input pair then the brand new idea
> >>>>>>>>>>> that I created "incorrect question" is formed:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> When-so-ever a yes/no question has no correct answer from the set of
> >>>>>>>>>>> yes/no or a decision problem TM/input pair has has no final state
> >>>>>>>>>>> indicting a correct Boolean value then it is an error.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Undecidability has always only been an error.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It is not that the correct true/false value cannot be chosen by the TM.
> >>>>>>>>>>> It is that both true/false values are the wrong answer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> H_Hat is constructed after H.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> There's always a right answer -
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> When the question is what Boolean value can H correctly return to an
> >>>>>>>>> input that does the opposite of what H decides it is as obvious as
> >>>>>>>>> Hell that there is no correct answer to this specific question.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That's your question. It's not the halting problem "question". You
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You are a God damned liar.
> >>>>>> Don't be so dramatic! You really should know what the halting problem
> >>>>>> is about by now. Did you not understand any of the definitions you've
> >>>>>> read? What about Sipser's? Did you understand his definition?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> When you change the question to: Does H P halt on its input you are
> >>>>>>>>> not answering the actual question with its full context.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You are, instead, asking the halting problem "question". This is a
> >>>>>>>> question that always has a correct yes/no answer, thought algorithm can
> >>>>>>>> determine which in every case.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Like the God damned liar that you have always been you stick with your
> >>>>>>> God damned lies.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Oh don't be such a drama queen! I am simply defining the halting
> >>>>>> problem, and you are denying the basic facts of the matter, just as you
> >>>>>> have been doing for years.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please quit being a God damned liar.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Did Sipser lie when he defined the halting problem as I do? Did Linz?
> >>>>>> What about Church, Kleene, Davis, Moore and all the others? Were they
> >>>>>> lying too? You really need to get over yourself.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You are a God damned liar when you insist that the context of the
> >>>>> question is not an intrinsic aspect of the question itself:
> >>>> The context is clear. There is a set of strings
> >>>> { <M, w> | M is a TM and H halts on input w }
> >>>> (I'm using Siper here.) The problem is whether this set is decidable.
> >>>> Is he lying? No. Like everyone but you, he clearly states the problem
> >>>> with all the context needed to understand it.
> >>>>
> >>>>> When a program H is defined such that its input P does the opposite of
> >>>>> whatever halt status that H decides for this input P both values of
> >>>>> true(halts) and false(never halts) are the wrong answer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is not the same freaking question as:
> >>>>> Does program P halt on its input I?
> >>>>
> >>>> I am glad we agree. Since we both agree there are two separate
> >>>> questions, do you have anything at all to say about the second one? I'd
> >>>
> >>> Does program P halting on input I?
> >>> Is a correct question for some H and an incorrect question for H that
> >>> is defined such that its input does the opposite of whatever it
> >>> decides.
> >> The second question: "Does program P halt on input I?" is the halting
> >> problem. The "incorrect question for" junk is your other question --
> >> the one you say, and I agree, is "not the same freaking question".
> >>
> >>> If we ask Donald Trump:
> >>> Are you the president of the United States?
> >>> He will lie and say yes.
> >>
> >> The halting problem is "Does program P halt on input I?". The correct
> >> answer is not defined or constrained by who or what we ask. The correct
> >> answer simply "yes" if, an only if, P(I) halts.
> >
> > Everyone the understands the science of language fully knows that who
> > is being asked a question is an intrinsic aspect of the semantic
> > meaning of this question.
> No. Whether P(I) is or is not a finite computation depends only on P
> and I. Whether you get the right answer depends on who or what you ask,
> but the correct answer is determined solely by the objects involved.
>
> P(P) halts (according to you). H(P, P) == 0 (according to you). That
> is wrong (according to everyone but you).
>
> --
> Ben.
hi ben
i could go on and on about
my observation that
core arguments
are boolean
contradictions
> + i have observed that the following structure is at the core of great arguments
> + given some single boolean ideal as some symbol written in some letters of some alphabet such as abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
> + plus any two real clauses on same implying unsatisfiability
> + p cnf 1 2
> + -1 0
> + 1 0
> +
> + p cnf 1 2
> + 1 0
> + -1 0
> +
> + the core of all great human argument in a language
> + model counting is going well ben
> + p cnf 1 2
> + +1 0
> + 1 0
> +
> + p cnf 1 2
> + 1 0
> + +1 0
> +
> + p cnf 1 2
> + ~1 0
> + 1 0
> +
> + p cnf 1 2
> + 1 0
> + ~1 0
> +
> variations on theme of
> one single boolean
> in unsatisfiable
> condition
> models
> zero
> 0
so choose booleans well
in order to define good
argumentation for bob
dear pete olcott depth twenty recursively and bob halts automatically
bob solves pspace reasoning formulas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-18 03:45 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) |
| Message-ID | <87wnpojq6f.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #36575 |
Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> writes: > hi ben > i could go on and on about > my observation that > core arguments > are boolean > contradictions I've wanted to learn more about your solver for some time, but I am unable to understand you. It would seem that bob did not do well in the competition. Rather than argue with the organisers, you've be better off trying to work out what went wrong so you can be better prepared next year. Unlike PO's waffle, you have software. And if that software does the right job well, you should be able to prove that unambiguously. And you should start new threads. Look at the mess of a subject line you are now talking under! -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-17 23:05 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) |
| Message-ID | <81710d6f-77b3-461c-be50-4632c3cd90bbn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36580 |
On Saturday, July 17, 2021 at 10:45:14 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Daniel Pehoushek <pehou...@gmail.com> writes: > > > hi ben > > i could go on and on about > > my observation that > > core arguments > > are boolean > > contradictions > I've wanted to learn more about your solver for some time, but I am > unable to understand you. > > It would seem that bob did not do well in the competition. Rather than > argue with the organisers, you've be better off trying to work out what > went wrong so you can be better prepared next year. > > Unlike PO's waffle, you have software. And if that software does the > right job well, you should be able to prove that unambiguously. > > And you should start new threads. Look at the mess of a subject line > you are now talking under! > > -- > Ben. bob returned only correct exact numbers of models, thus winning track1 in my opinion. what went wrong is their inexact answers system, as the other programs were approximate solvers. they decided to report the answer with log10, losing all exactness. i will argue with them. i also have a "revised relativization theorem": P=NP for small n P!=NP for large N daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-19 10:11 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) |
| Message-ID | <CLWdnetcAdqgC2j9nZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36572 |
On 7/17/2021 8:27 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 7/16/2021 7:43 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 7/15/2021 9:09 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/15/2021 7:17 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/15/2021 3:04 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 7/15/2021 3:44 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, 15 July 2021 at 04:12:32 UTC+1, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/14/2021 9:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When you provide the context of a TM/input pair then the brand new idea
>>>>>>>>>>>> that I created "incorrect question" is formed:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When-so-ever a yes/no question has no correct answer from the set of
>>>>>>>>>>>> yes/no or a decision problem TM/input pair has has no final state
>>>>>>>>>>>> indicting a correct Boolean value then it is an error.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Undecidability has always only been an error.
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not that the correct true/false value cannot be chosen by the TM.
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is that both true/false values are the wrong answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> H_Hat is constructed after H.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There's always a right answer -
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When the question is what Boolean value can H correctly return to an
>>>>>>>>>> input that does the opposite of what H decides it is as obvious as
>>>>>>>>>> Hell that there is no correct answer to this specific question.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's your question. It's not the halting problem "question". You
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are a God damned liar.
>>>>>>> Don't be so dramatic! You really should know what the halting problem
>>>>>>> is about by now. Did you not understand any of the definitions you've
>>>>>>> read? What about Sipser's? Did you understand his definition?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When you change the question to: Does H P halt on its input you are
>>>>>>>>>> not answering the actual question with its full context.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are, instead, asking the halting problem "question". This is a
>>>>>>>>> question that always has a correct yes/no answer, thought algorithm can
>>>>>>>>> determine which in every case.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like the God damned liar that you have always been you stick with your
>>>>>>>> God damned lies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh don't be such a drama queen! I am simply defining the halting
>>>>>>> problem, and you are denying the basic facts of the matter, just as you
>>>>>>> have been doing for years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please quit being a God damned liar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Did Sipser lie when he defined the halting problem as I do? Did Linz?
>>>>>>> What about Church, Kleene, Davis, Moore and all the others? Were they
>>>>>>> lying too? You really need to get over yourself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are a God damned liar when you insist that the context of the
>>>>>> question is not an intrinsic aspect of the question itself:
>>>>> The context is clear. There is a set of strings
>>>>> { <M, w> | M is a TM and H halts on input w }
>>>>> (I'm using Siper here.) The problem is whether this set is decidable.
>>>>> Is he lying? No. Like everyone but you, he clearly states the problem
>>>>> with all the context needed to understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> When a program H is defined such that its input P does the opposite of
>>>>>> whatever halt status that H decides for this input P both values of
>>>>>> true(halts) and false(never halts) are the wrong answer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is not the same freaking question as:
>>>>>> Does program P halt on its input I?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am glad we agree. Since we both agree there are two separate
>>>>> questions, do you have anything at all to say about the second one? I'd
>>>>
>>>> Does program P halting on input I?
>>>> Is a correct question for some H and an incorrect question for H that
>>>> is defined such that its input does the opposite of whatever it
>>>> decides.
>>> The second question: "Does program P halt on input I?" is the halting
>>> problem. The "incorrect question for" junk is your other question --
>>> the one you say, and I agree, is "not the same freaking question".
>>>
>>>> If we ask Donald Trump:
>>>> Are you the president of the United States?
>>>> He will lie and say yes.
>>>
>>> The halting problem is "Does program P halt on input I?". The correct
>>> answer is not defined or constrained by who or what we ask. The correct
>>> answer simply "yes" if, an only if, P(I) halts.
>>
>> Everyone the understands the science of language fully knows that who
>> is being asked a question is an intrinsic aspect of the semantic
>> meaning of this question.
>
> No. Whether P(I) is or is not a finite computation depends only on P
> and I. Whether you get the right answer depends on who or what you ask,
> but the correct answer is determined solely by the objects involved.
>
> P(P) halts (according to you). H(P, P) == 0 (according to you). That
> is wrong (according to everyone but you).
>
Pathological Input to a halt decider is defined as any input that was
defined to do the opposite of whatever its corresponding halt decider
decides.
This question can only be correctly answered after the pathology has
been removed. When a halt decider only acts as a pure simulator of its
input until after its halt status decision is made there is no feedback
loop of back channel communication between the halt decider and its
input that can prevent a correct halt status decision.
--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-16 22:52 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ](and Flibble) |
| Message-ID | <kmtII.24460$5Y6.3431@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #36373 |
On 7/15/21 9:03 PM, olcott wrote: > Does program P halting on input I? > Is a correct question for some H and an incorrect question for H that is > defined such that its input does the opposite of whatever it decides. > Given that P is fully defined, this ALWAYS has a right answer, as P(I) will either Halt or Not, independent of what Halting Decider you are asking to make the decision. If you mean by H the specific H that P was built on, that that H HAS a defined result that it will give for a this given machine P, and it will always be wrong. Remember, the machine P is DEFINED in relationship to the Halt Decider it is based on, so if you start to do logic with a changing H, then the P that corresponds to that H is now a dependent variable, and really each different H should have a new name and the corresponding P needs a similar name. Note, this is why Linz used the ^ notation. For Decider H, we have H^, for decider H1, we have H1^ and so on, we can talk about the different H's and there corresponding H^'s You lack of distinct names violate the basic Software Principle of not reusing the same name for different objects/functions, even if scope might make it clear.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-15 13:12 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <7ecf9207-3c7d-49be-a138-256053b3b968n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36332 |
dear pete olcott
the main argument i have goes as follows
i am presently in heaven working on the holy grail a very generally positive identity
you however with your streams of negations of ideas in sentences
want me to reenter the hell of thinking by negation to talk with you
i should really just work on my pspace solver bob
bob only has a planned halt decider
that makes him a real holy grail
i am busy proving to the model
counting competition committee that bob is a holy grail
here is how it went this morning
wish me luck in winning the title "holy grail" for bob
daniel
thanks for the feedback.
i appreciate every email that academics send to me.over the years i have tried and failed so many times to begin conversations with academics
that academics shall forever recognize as an absurdity of reason on their part not mine
my internet has been offline since my last email.
i want to verify that bob is the holy grail
while you mumble at some length about how valuable and
important all the work on approximation tracks has been
how much value satisfiability dot org puts into studying the big n hard part of the problem
where i am only interested in the right answer only part of the theory problem
including zero answers on large problems as a valid answer for a holy grail
>In this year's competition, solvers were clearly encouraged to output at highest precision
>(and indicate their precision).
bob the holy grail Only prints out right answers never wrong never approximate for bob is the holy grail
that is highest possible precision but your competition does not include only right answers only as a track
i will be glad to mutually validate any of the communitys proposed holy grail programs step by step
i encourage your struggles for correctness on all zips i send
the idea is once we have a holy grail we can validate all other future holy grails with great ease
>Regarding your other statement, let me refer you to Section 1.2.11: Asymptotic Representations in Don Knuth's
>The Art of Computer Programming or Edmund Landau's work on Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen.
well doan be bashful to me about don
i loved the guy when i studied his metafont architecture
tell him i now only use the smaller alphabet of lowecase for very primitive recursive reasons and that my support for aleph null is very very weak
i know he has valuable stuff to tell me
what is it you want to quote
my quote is mostly about a correction
in garey and johnson page 185
revised relativization: P=NP for small n, P!=NP for large N
tell him i first discovered #P=#Q in 1997 and published at satisfiability 2002 my major fundamental paper
on the satisfiability problem and my middle initial is little d
and for your holy grail studies and amusement
i include my blog from while i was offline
by education of war for so long god has created a superpowerful race able to analyze space and time at a glance then disguized them in bumble bee containers dear bees always seek the higher ground //jdp
dear the two kings of the iranian see f e a r i n d i a as i d o w i t h o u t f e a r//jdp
my very own dear father of diapers for men birthday year of birth two plus mom so dad is mom less two moms was yesterday she is twenty seven plus a good number gausses favorite number times bobs favorite number of years on the calender of the wheel the cosmic wheel of many plausible cosmologies
i crappify upon all and over all hindu spiritual leaders of to god damn many men
dear union of all academies i rule by plus one throughout all kingdoms great plus many small //jdp
charges of fraud are being drawn upon one maybe all academic departments for not including model counts in the model counting competition
they do not compute
i shall defend earth with ease while i yet live although i spend every spare dollar metal coin on marlboro cigarettes
so this century god has given me a universal basic income so that i could do my work in peace on pspace
so bob can be used by the community to build a validated model database to work well with
since your database does not have any validated model counts just use bobs and go from there
what i need to know is the proper reference i can use when saying bob won model counting 2021
at this time i say just enter bob in all future "accurate answers only are counted" competitions
i shall say bob is the holy grail comp theory has been searching for from the inside of some very creative structure built by god
another way of telling seti my true identity is to tell the people of seti that the et searched for terrestrial intelligence
who would have thought they would do that and et found me
the latest version includes #inferences and #assumptions as a metaphysical part of the answer
dear academics let me be perfectly verbally clear as a 2380 can be verbally i work for god
to make your model counting competition valid you must include only valid answers
to put it bluntly the idea of approximation of the best answer was designed by an evil serpent from hell
any wrong answer at all and then shall it go poorly for any presumed holy grail
of primary value to god in a holy grail is a minimal number of data structure operations to get the right answer only
so count your inferences and clause sharing events accurately for side by side comparison of two holy grails
with bob the work report to god about the number of assumptions and number of inferences comes in three parts
after the #P answer in base ten comes the #assumptions bob used to solve the customers reasoning problem but
of more importance is the number of inferences needed by the customer to solve the customers own thinking problem
this number the most important number to god on the answer line is #billions + #hundredsofmillions of inferences
that bob estimates will be needed by god to solve the customers problems to boolean completeness
then after getting thoroughly bad news europeans should get with the monotone american plan and remove minus from their codes
when europeans finally see the american supreme court make these two rulings they will then be assured i have finally changed the machine
or when world government agrees that to beat the heat of hell in less than fifty years a clean international beginning is needed by the species of earth so
one time only offer all national debt is forgiven so many national banks get a fresh new beginning
abortion is bad weapons are bad
until europeans see those rulings from america they should disbelieve everything i write
here is a valid sort of table description for the future comp theory community
all nations full census every ten years with yearly updates
these sentences are triviality for me to write
the question every president has to ask is has india stabilized itself
for fifty years as a part of the soap on the oceans desperate plan
you see dear humans i hope you see dear humans that
gods definition of indian star from red super novas
where indian science of dropping instruments into their suns
takes some planning likely already done but i say hay
the good news is gods good government measure is easy
number of dead children per month per county per nation per continent per planet in this universe
cuts the states out of the bureaucracy of good government measures
dear children of earth academia has been a problem for god so
god shall never ever again honor or tribute academic suicide
plus academia must use less than operations to well order the numbers from one to two thousand three hundred and eighty out of twenty four hundred
for patrick winston of itty bitty mit i did write the sweetest word processor any writer of words in bubbles could have desired
for john mccarthy i implemented and design low cost fork join parallelism in lisp and then i joined the formal reasoning group as a student
i studied then rejected cheesemans work in two days after generating siv five regular three cnfs
i designed parallel register set memory circuitry for intels first multicore cpu
i designed and implemented industrial +vision system for cardiff software
i published skip search an n over m pattern recognition algorithm CPM98
in 2002 i published introduction to qspace but i forgot to put my 2380 gre score on it
so
what i want from the committee is the proper way for me to tell people that i won the competition
right now i am just not seeing it as well formed for my personal growth certificate file system in heaven
dear dear mathematicians about your letter of foundation aleph null
you use it to think symbolically like a deity but
my advice to god is as follows
support just one single theoretical idea aleph null
replace all occurrences of that math letter in math writing and reason with zero then read the writing
as for the letter i remove from the alphabet that may be studied by all people of discerning nature
the ctenoid words are there for all to see i now say corred + perfed with joy
dear jihadists god ezists please put your weapons down
and the humorous but true any jihadist whose penis falls off must be reported to the vatican
dear suicidal mathematicians god is considering me to be god of all athiests so doan worry about me delicate judgements
on gods present day theory of the identity red
is red the sentience of some distant far far distant dead old bugger minded beetle sentience or does god need a solution
for human beings red is never alarming anymore red fire trucks be damned
red is often beautiful to humans because of the color of human blood means we are among friends very comforting for humans to believe they live in a universe partially designed by human related sentiences
dear governor dewine of big oh big oh big oh of ohio
heard you on npr again like a tweet into the atmosphere may i help
the new good government measure by god of good government is
number of dead children per county per month
same as gods old measurement of good government
dear npr i call you talkback radio
tell iran i whole heartedly support theocracy when weapons are bad
god himself is yet studying validity of uranium
my opinion jdp is that uranium is clean and cheap really really cheap
on solar energy from the light of god that is always good as all trees well know a model of propriety in their worship
dear trees ez is ten trees for better results two lonely trees is nearly a mutual definition of cold if not cool
dear people if soap on the ocean for snow on the mountains is too hard to comprehend then plant pairs of male female trees
dear npr all government lockdowns that merely reinforce police state architectures in government are always banned in the future dear npr please use much more gods measurement of good government in your blog to me
meanwhile waiting for gmail from satisfiabity dot org about including model counts as part of the truthful answer in the model counting competition
when bob does yet have the most primitive of bobserver systems which is zero bobservers then the right answer on large formulas is just keep going keep counting and pray hell may yet freeze over (all approximations of gods desires contain reasoning paths that lead all to hell)
dear npr coming up in ten minutes is one ay the free speech segment on talkback radio
new york city gauge any metaphysical feelings of its getting hotter than hells kitchen so we need a fifty year plan similar to daniels plan
dear new york city my present investment position is buy proctor and gamble
buy volume of gold trading for fifty years buy silver buy pennies buy dollar coins in case printing bignums on paper collapses
dear governments of men the proper spelling is t a y for your income source in the government system
i doan need you for very much myself as long as i have universal basic income from god
as for three letter government departments that must study computers
i am willing to sell bob source code to every such three letter government department
for one billion dollars per copy or they can get a free copy just like i gave to the russians and chinese
as for voting
dear tezas i hate the x
see for yourself by studying then respelling all occurrences of the letter x in all amaerican writing
so about vote counting
gods algorithm for voting is that god counts and weighs the votes
god is also the union of three universal gods often called trinity
the internet is nearly back online
i can hardly wait for the news from satisfiability dot org
their validity situation is bob is the holy grail
and now they must allow me to prove that bob is the holy grail
in heads up mutual validations of accurate answers to boolean reasoning formulas
i am gentle but a stickler on the detail that model counters count models
my opinion of approximations from hell is very low
they may as they get closer to having their very own academically european holy grails
desire to compare efficiency of bobs reason with their efficiency from hell of
the precise count of change in the distributed logic problem
as i say bob is a holy grail all previous work is embarassed
the question on the table today
do academics of all state universitys serve god or do they serve hell
we shall see as soon as i get internet back
so
i shall again try to remember my gre score to give helpful little hints to academis
be happy to compare real model counts on nineteen.zip
staisfiability dot org shall grow more embarassed the deeper they study my work
gres 2380/2400
every academic must put their gre score on every imprtant communication for
quick astute judgements about the value in the communication
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 7:33 AM Johannes Fichte <johannes.fichte@tu-dresden.de> wrote:
Hi Daniel,
I've been a bit busy with various things and might have overlooked a couple of your emails.
Regarding the question of counting exactly and having arbitrary precision, I agree that this is
a tense and controversially discussed question. However, I disagree that an additional approximate
output is "crap". There are clearly use-cases for approximate counting or even heuristics.
In this year's competition, solvers were clearly encouraged to output at highest precision
(and indicate their precision).
The estimate in the format ensures that we have a common output over multiple techniques,
which in addition avoids over- and underflows. Yes, we did not enforce arbitrary precision.
For next year's competition, the current idea is to evaluate either the same set of instances or three sets
under three sub-tracks: Exact (arbitrary precision), High Precision, Approximate.
Regarding your other statement, let me refer you to Section 1.2.11: Asymptotic Representations in Don Knuth's
The Art of Computer Programming or Edmund Landau's work on Handbuch der Lehre von der Verteilung der Primzahlen.
Thanks for your contribution to this year's competition and
also for submitting benchmarks.
Cheers,
Johannes
On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 4:19 PM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
what i am proposing is an "after conference dialogue".
my main agenda is a followup round where track1 entries accurately count models.
so model counts or counts of models would be a fundamental part of the answer system, instead of "approximatation log10 crap". total correctness is key for track1.
i have the following correction from page 185 of garey and johnson:
revised relativization: P=NP for small n, P!=NP for large n.
daniel
On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:11 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
dear model counting competition organizers
here is a small dataset plus small answer log for validation systems
please send me the email addresses of track1 only entrants
so that the post conference follow up may soon begin
i am in search of validateable benchmark suites
there seem to be technical arguments about what should
model counting competitions count in answer tables
i say they should count models in answer tables
the present organization uses approximation
which is just plain simple wrong thinking
bob is a special holy grail program
embarassing to all previous work
class allqbfs is a gold mine
for the entire community
summary for academia
count better and
better every
blessed
year
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 12:27 PM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
more stoneyonehundreds
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 11:23 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
i am going to send
stoneyonehundred_4
through
stoneyonehundred_9.zips
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 4:51 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
dear model counters
i count models of truth over small formulas
validity correctness depth et cetera
i count most specifically
the number of inferences i used to get an answer
i challenge all track1 entrants to the post conference validity game
where i prove bob is valid on all small formulas
sincerely daniel
currently going on in comp dot theory
currently going on on another news group thread
on sci dot math and sci dot physics
dear search for eztraterrestrial intelligence systems
i am on earth searching for terrestrial intelligence
On Thursday, July 8, 2021 at 5:20:08 AM UTC-4, Daniel Pehoushek wrote:
> is anyone else interested in dark matter and dark energy math?
> i think the answer may be simple.
newtons revised universal law of gravitation
{F over G} * (r*r) = (m1*m2) (logm2*logm1)
{{F over G} * (r*r)} over {m1*m2} = (logm2*logm1)
accounting for dark matter
einsteins revised is an afterthought of newtons revised
e=(m*logm)*c^2
(e/(mcc)) = logm
accounting for dark energy
revised relativization: P=NP for small n P!=NP for large n
daniel (little d) gres 2380 800 verbal 780 analytical 800 math sats 1530 780 math 750 verbal
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 4:12 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
shortest validity certificate so far is
[N8.veg 9]
1 (n 0 m 8) (bobs 1 om 1 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 1
2 (n 0 m 8) (bobs 1 om 1 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 1
3 (n 0 m 8) (bobs 1 om 1 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 1
4 (n 0 m 8) (bobs 1 om 1 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 1
5 (n 8 m 8) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 8)):(2 0 0 1 8 ): #P 1
6 (n 8 m 12) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 8)):(3 0 0 1 8 2 4 ): #P 0
7 (n 8 m 16) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 7)):(3 0 0 1 8 2 8 ): #P 0
8 (n 8 m 20) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 6)):(3 0 0 1 8 2 12 ): #P 0 there are a few missing numbols
9 (n 8 m 0) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 256
10 (n 8 m 8) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 0)):(3 0 0 1 0 2 8 ): #P 16 there are a few missing numbols
11 (n 8 m 14) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 0)):(3 0 0 1 0 2 14 ): #P 0
12 (n 8 m 24) (bobs 9 om 17 (h 0)):(3 0 0 1 0 2 24 ): #P 0
13 (n 16 m 8) (bobs 17 om 33 (h 0)):(3 0 0 1 0 2 8 ): #P 6561
14 (n 16 m 20) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 8 3 0 4 12 ): #P 1296
15 (n 16 m 32) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 8 3 0 4 24 ): #P 258
16 (n 16 m 44) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 8 3 0 4 36 ): #P 60 there are a few missing numbols
17 (n 16 m 0) (bobs 17 om 33 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 65536
18 (n 16 m 16) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 16 ): #P 20736
19 (n 16 m 32) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 32 ): #P 6564
20 (n 16 m 48) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 48 ): #P 1752
21 (n 16 m 64) (bobs 25 om 65 (h 0)):(5 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 64 ): #P 816
22 (n 24 m 24) (bobs 33 om 81 (h 0)):(4 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 24 ): #P 390625
23 (n 24 m 44) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 24 4 0 5 0 6 20 ): #P 160000
24 (n 24 m 59) (bobs 54 om 193 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 24 4 0 5 0 6 35 ): #P 78000
25 (n 24 m 84) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 24 4 0 5 0 6 60 ): #P 53300
26 (n 24 m 99) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 24 4 0 5 0 6 75 ): #P 14940
27 (n 24 m 16) (bobs 33 om 81 (h 0)):(4 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 16 ): #P 1679616
28 (n 24 m 40) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 16 4 0 5 0 6 24 ): #P 810000
29 (n 24 m 64) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 16 4 0 5 0 6 48 ): #P 374400
30 (n 24 m 88) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 16 4 0 5 0 6 72 ): #P 259560
31 (n 24 m 112) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 16 4 0 5 0 6 96 ): #P 101760
32 (n 24 m 8) (bobs 33 om 81 (h 0)):(4 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 8 ): #P 5764801
33 (n 24 m 36) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 8 4 0 5 0 6 28 ): #P 3111696
34 (n 24 m 64) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 8 4 0 5 0 6 56 ): #P 1852200
35 (n 24 m 92) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 8 4 0 5 0 6 84 ): #P 1002540
36 (n 24 m 120) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 8 4 0 5 0 6 112 ): #P 608580 there are a few missing numbols
37 (n 24 m 0) (bobs 25 om 49 (h 0)):(0 ): #P 16777216
38 (n 24 m 32) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 32 ): #P 9834496
39 (n 24 m 64) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 64 ): #P 6588736
40 (n 24 m 96) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 96 ): #P 4247712
41 (n 24 m 128) (bobs 57 om 209 (h 0)):(7 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 128 ): #P 3207456
[N8.veg 41 (t 57021490 z 5 )(work 3903345 0 551786782)]
#41=
c N8 D4 M16 reps 1 randcalls 35 ones 0 twos 4 threes 2
gid 8 16 330
p veg 8 16
1 2 7 7 3
2 4 6 6
3 7 7 4
4 8 5
5 8 8 6
6 8
7
8
p cnf 24 128
1 9 17 2 10 18 0
+1 9 17 +2 10 18 0
1 +9 17 2 +10 18 0
+1 +9 17 +2 +10 18 0
1 9 +17 2 10 +18 0
+1 9 +17 +2 10 +18 0
1 +9 +17 2 +10 +18 0
+1 +9 +17 +2 +10 +18 0
1 9 17 7 15 23 0
+1 9 17 +7 15 23 0
1 +9 17 7 +15 23 0
+1 +9 17 +7 +15 23 0
1 9 +17 7 15 +23 0
+1 9 +17 +7 15 +23 0
1 +9 +17 7 +15 +23 0
+1 +9 +17 +7 +15 +23 0
1 9 17 7 15 23 0
+1 9 17 +7 15 23 0
1 +9 17 7 +15 23 0
+1 +9 17 +7 +15 23 0
1 9 +17 7 15 +23 0
+1 9 +17 +7 15 +23 0
1 +9 +17 7 +15 +23 0
+1 +9 +17 +7 +15 +23 0
1 9 17 3 11 19 0
+1 9 17 +3 11 19 0
1 +9 17 3 +11 19 0
+1 +9 17 +3 +11 19 0
1 9 +17 3 11 +19 0
+1 9 +17 +3 11 +19 0
1 +9 +17 3 +11 +19 0
+1 +9 +17 +3 +11 +19 0
2 10 18 4 12 20 0
+2 10 18 +4 12 20 0
2 +10 18 4 +12 20 0
+2 +10 18 +4 +12 20 0
2 10 +18 4 12 +20 0
+2 10 +18 +4 12 +20 0
2 +10 +18 4 +12 +20 0
+2 +10 +18 +4 +12 +20 0
2 10 18 6 14 22 0
+2 10 18 +6 14 22 0
2 +10 18 6 +14 22 0
+2 +10 18 +6 +14 22 0
2 10 +18 6 14 +22 0
+2 10 +18 +6 14 +22 0
2 +10 +18 6 +14 +22 0
+2 +10 +18 +6 +14 +22 0
2 10 18 6 14 22 0
+2 10 18 +6 14 22 0
2 +10 18 6 +14 22 0
+2 +10 18 +6 +14 22 0
2 10 +18 6 14 +22 0
+2 10 +18 +6 14 +22 0
2 +10 +18 6 +14 +22 0
+2 +10 +18 +6 +14 +22 0
3 11 19 7 15 23 0
+3 11 19 +7 15 23 0
3 +11 19 7 +15 23 0
+3 +11 19 +7 +15 23 0
3 11 +19 7 15 +23 0
+3 11 +19 +7 15 +23 0
3 +11 +19 7 +15 +23 0
+3 +11 +19 +7 +15 +23 0
3 11 19 7 15 23 0
+3 11 19 +7 15 23 0
3 +11 19 7 +15 23 0
+3 +11 19 +7 +15 23 0
3 11 +19 7 15 +23 0
+3 11 +19 +7 15 +23 0
3 +11 +19 7 +15 +23 0
+3 +11 +19 +7 +15 +23 0
3 11 19 4 12 20 0
+3 11 19 +4 12 20 0
3 +11 19 4 +12 20 0
+3 +11 19 +4 +12 20 0
3 11 +19 4 12 +20 0
+3 11 +19 +4 12 +20 0
3 +11 +19 4 +12 +20 0
+3 +11 +19 +4 +12 +20 0
4 12 20 8 16 24 0
+4 12 20 +8 16 24 0
4 +12 20 8 +16 24 0
+4 +12 20 +8 +16 24 0
4 12 +20 8 16 +24 0
+4 12 +20 +8 16 +24 0
4 +12 +20 8 +16 +24 0
+4 +12 +20 +8 +16 +24 0
4 12 20 5 13 21 0
+4 12 20 +5 13 21 0
4 +12 20 5 +13 21 0
+4 +12 20 +5 +13 21 0
4 12 +20 5 13 +21 0
+4 12 +20 +5 13 +21 0
4 +12 +20 5 +13 +21 0
+4 +12 +20 +5 +13 +21 0
5 13 21 8 16 24 0
+5 13 21 +8 16 24 0
5 +13 21 8 +16 24 0
+5 +13 21 +8 +16 24 0
5 13 +21 8 16 +24 0
+5 13 +21 +8 16 +24 0
5 +13 +21 8 +16 +24 0
+5 +13 +21 +8 +16 +24 0
5 13 21 8 16 24 0
+5 13 21 +8 16 24 0
5 +13 21 8 +16 24 0
+5 +13 21 +8 +16 24 0
5 13 +21 8 16 +24 0
+5 13 +21 +8 16 +24 0
5 +13 +21 8 +16 +24 0
+5 +13 +21 +8 +16 +24 0
5 13 21 6 14 22 0
+5 13 21 +6 14 22 0
5 +13 21 6 +14 22 0
+5 +13 21 +6 +14 22 0
5 13 +21 6 14 +22 0
+5 13 +21 +6 14 +22 0
5 +13 +21 6 +14 +22 0
+5 +13 +21 +6 +14 +22 0
6 14 22 8 16 24 0
+6 14 22 +8 16 24 0
6 +14 22 8 +16 24 0
+6 +14 22 +8 +16 24 0
6 14 +22 8 16 +24 0
+6 14 +22 +8 16 +24 0
6 +14 +22 8 +16 +24 0
+6 +14 +22 +8 +16 +24 0
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 3:15 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
so just take the databases of all solvers on my graphcolor.zip submission
how many track one only entrants remain? we can work with these only
the correctness vector of truth on graphcolor.zip shall become very stable
so will initialize.zip and the stoney100 aka graphcolor.log
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 3:04 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
think of operating system validation
as the hand waving of
a wand of truth vectors
around system files
beginning with their bob
is the file system
essentially sane
linearly sane
administratively sane
checksum quickcheck
algorithms are good
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 2:34 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
bob is the holy grail
initialize dot zip
validates other
solvers to a degree
but stony100.zip
truthfully does that
graphcolor.zip
was my initial
benchmark submission
bobs first sword of truth versus other immortal solvers
graphcolor dot zip
initialize.zip
stony100.zip
and we have yet to discuss the allqbfs gold mine
where with allqbfs class any completely correct solver can become a complete qspace solver overnight
q formulas given p formulas list all universal truths used by the p formula during reason
as i say quite a deal is now possible with bob and i personally want gold one ounce per copy of bob source or now doggy cpp source
On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 2:09 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
i submitted the holy grail of the problem which is a totally correct program
and your competition has zero equipment for detecting the holy grail
much less validating the correctness of the holy grail when there
what should i do but vainly try again to emphasize why just why oh why is total
correctness of the holy grail so holy when finally it is proven that holy grail correctness
has properties that go beyond merely normal correctness
i will provide a vector of totally correct answers including none yet for harder but also correct
results all i ask is for you to tell me yet how far from perfect is bob
by sure true enumeration tiny correctness points such as correct answer along with to compute that answer the minimal number of assumptions inferences pairs
my position is i have bob the holy grail program and i can easily prove that interactively
how best then for me to proceed is provide a database of the tiniest correct points
which i did for N0 through N9 graph coloring formulas for all graphs with less than ten vertys
the tiniest possible complete set of test formulas for testing primitive correctness of every competitive solver with smallest validated set of all small formulas
the holy grail has magical properties that together could we test together on
together on the teeniest tiniest god damned formulas for graph coloring all small graphs
think of it you and me doing strange things with the holy grail over all other track one only entrants need be to compete with me
i have produced the tiniest such complete set of all small formulas N0 zero vertys graph coloring formulas there on through one two three vertys
all small coloring formulas on up through three vertys in files up through N3.veg to get a final initial correctness line
[bigsums (tfiles 10 tforms 371) (numberp 463937979 zeromos 33)(retros 24658247 bigoh 3 Billion 627191582)]
covering only correctness of all small coloring formulas of up to nine vertys
every entry must validate all N0 through N9
then the stoney100
then graphcolor.zip my already submitted vector of total truth
when vectors of total truth such as graphcolor.zip are recognized
can those total truth vectors be wielded as a mighty godly god armed sword of righteous truth and justice throughout the solver community
what do you guys say? will you help me validate my holy grail program bob for counting true models only of all small boolean formulas?
i assure you that the end result is a gold mine for the community plus the holy grail+
so please find attached the correctness log on all small boolean formulas
my latest version of bob is doggy with numerous as yet undiscovered features
oh yes and i do indeed call the entire validating process time with god
my doggy source code is computer circuitry for that
sincerely daniel
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
for the N0.veg through N9.veg benchmarks
please use the attached log for my entry vector of only only only correct answers in vector
On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 7:45 AM daniel <pehoushek1@gmail.com> wrote:
hi guys.
well, is bob totally correct?
were any other entries totally correct in track 1?
i have some follow up benchmarks i would like to try.
is there a follow up round of benchmarks?
an email list of track 1 entrants perhaps?
thanks in advance.
daniel
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
--
Soap upon Ocean Snows upon Mountains ( cool hypothesis )
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw yz0
gods favorite number is three
gods favorite symbol is +
square of reason
11111110
11111101
11111011
11110111
11101111
11011111
10111111
01111111
hi ben i have been off the internet for a couple days
i hope the above catches you up on where i am with
the model counting competition 2021
i really can prove to them
that
i have the holy grail
if only they do reply
by valid email
going great
stables fable daniel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-16 22:39 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <BatII.37499$VU3.28494@fx46.iad> |
| In reply to | #36332 |
On 7/15/21 8:17 AM, olcott wrote: >>> >> H_Hat is constructed after H. > Both H and P are static machine-code in a COFF object file. Then THAT'S your problem, Your P isn't the equivalent of Linz H^, as H^ is the ENTIRE Turing Machine H^, which includes the complete copy of the algorithm of H in it. Your 'proof' is now invalidated as your first comment that you are working with the Turing Equivalent X86 code is now admitted to be false. The Halting Problem is about Turing Machine which are the equivalent to COMPLETE PROGRAMS, not code framements. Code Fragments don't necessarily HAVE a 'Halting Value' as they may not be an actual computation (A computation is a COMPLETE description of an operation, so if the fragment depend on anything not part of it or an explicit input, it isn't a computtion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 09:08 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <scka93$ure$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36245 |
On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that H(P, >> P) halts? >> > > I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never halts. > This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly decided. Once again, you are evading the question. Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking whether it halts. >> If so, how can you claim that P(P), when run as an *independent* >> computation, does not halt given that it performs the exact same steps > > When we test the DNA of a cat and find that it is definitely a cat and > this cat later gives birth to purebred Chihuahua puppies we know for > sure that it is definitely a cat. > >> as H(P, P)? Both start simulating what you describe as an 'infinitely >> nested simulation' and both suspend that simulation at some point for >> identical reasons. >> >> André >> > > -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 10:33 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <7ZKdnUD6mMrCL3D9nZ2dnUU7-IudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36250 |
On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: > >>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that H(P, >>> P) halts? >>> >> >> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never halts. >> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly >> decided. > > Once again, you are evading the question. > > Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking whether > it halts. > H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. This does not count as halting. >>> If so, how can you claim that P(P), when run as an *independent* >>> computation, does not halt given that it performs the exact same steps >> >> When we test the DNA of a cat and find that it is definitely a cat and >> this cat later gives birth to purebred Chihuahua puppies we know for >> sure that it is definitely a cat. >> >>> as H(P, P)? Both start simulating what you describe as an 'infinitely >>> nested simulation' and both suspend that simulation at some point for >>> identical reasons. >>> >>> André >>> >> >> > > -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 09:36 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <sckbts$jpt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36252 |
On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> >>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that H(P, >>>> P) halts? >>>> >>> >>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never halts. >>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly >>> decided. >> >> Once again, you are evading the question. >> >> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >> whether it halts. >> > > H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because its > infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. This does > not count as halting. If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an admission that you don't have a decider at all. André -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 10:43 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <b6Cdncyk_NU4KXD9nZ2dnUU7-SmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36254 |
On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> >>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that >>>>> H(P, P) halts? >>>>> >>>> >>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never >>>> halts. >>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly >>>> decided. >>> >>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>> >>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>> whether it halts. >>> >> >> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because its >> infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. This >> does not count as halting. > > > If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an > admission that you don't have a decider at all. > > André > H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. I think that your behavior is dumber than a box of rocks only because you make sure to hardly pay any attention at all. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 10:11 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <sckdvi$g55$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36255 |
On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> >>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that >>>>>> H(P, P) halts? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never >>>>> halts. >>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly >>>>> decided. >>>> >>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>> >>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>> whether it halts. >>>> >>> >>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because its >>> infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. This >>> does not count as halting. >> >> >> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an >> admission that you don't have a decider at all. >> >> André >> > > H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. When H > forces its input to stop running this does not make its input halt. > Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. If H(P, P) returns a decision, that means it reaches one of its final states which is, *by definition*, what it means for something to halt. Are you now retracting your above claim that H(P, P) never halts? André -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 17:21 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <FJKdnefzHr9sjHP9nZ2dnUU7-UXNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36256 |
On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that >>>>>>> H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never >>>>>> halts. >>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is correctly >>>>>> decided. >>>>> >>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>> >>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>>> whether it halts. >>>>> >>>> >>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because its >>>> infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. This >>>> does not count as halting. >>> >>> >>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an >>> admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>> >>> André >>> >> >> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. When H >> forces its input to stop running this does not make its input halt. >> Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. > > I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I was > quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, P) but > to the computation H(P, P) itself. These are all elements of the same infinite chain. > Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't > halt. > Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never halts. > If H(P, P) returns a decision, that means it reaches one of its final > states which is, *by definition*, what it means for something to halt. > Are you now retracting your above claim that H(P, P) never halts? > > André > -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 16:44 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <scl506$t6n$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36261 |
On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that >>>>>>>> H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input never >>>>>>> halts. >>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>> >>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>>>> whether it halts. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because >>>>> its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. >>>>> This does not count as halting. >>>> >>>> >>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an >>>> admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>> >>>> André >>>> >>> >>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. When >>> H forces its input to stop running this does not make its input halt. >>> Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >> >> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I was >> quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, P) but >> to the computation H(P, P) itself. > > These are all elements of the same infinite chain. There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the third element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth element. What you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal infinite in any numbering system of which I am aware. >> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >> > > Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third element > of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never halts. If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is *not* a decider. A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. André -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 17:55 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <6I6dndvgovpUhHP9nZ2dnUU7-fGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36263 |
On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim that >>>>>>>>> H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>>>>> whether it halts. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because >>>>>> its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. >>>>>> This does not count as halting. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is an >>>>> admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>> >>>>> André >>>>> >>>> >>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. When >>>> H forces its input to stop running this does not make its input >>>> halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >>> >>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I >>> was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, >>> P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >> >> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. > > There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the third > element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth element. What you > have is a chain of three. Three does not equal infinite in any numbering > system of which I am aware. > >>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>> >> >> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never halts. > > If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is *not* a > decider. > > A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. > > André > > You are simply making sure to not pay attention. You do this with very intentional disrespect. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 17:08 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <scl6d8$eq3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36265 |
On 2021-07-13 16:55, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim >>>>>>>>>> that H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>>>>>> whether it halts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because >>>>>>> its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution suspended. >>>>>>> This does not count as halting. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is >>>>>> an admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> André >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. >>>>> When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its >>>>> input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >>>> >>>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I >>>> was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, >>>> P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >>> >>> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. >> >> There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the third >> element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth element. What >> you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal infinite in any >> numbering system of which I am aware. >> >>>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>>> >>> >>> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >>> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never >>> halts. >> >> If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is *not* >> a decider. >> >> A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. >> >> André >> >> > > You are simply making sure to not pay attention. > You do this with very intentional disrespect. To what, exactly, am I not paying attention? On the one hand, you claim to have created a (partial) halt decider. On the other hand, you claim that this (partial) halt decider *fails to halt* on the one input you claim to care about. This is contradiction, plain and simple. André -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 18:50 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <y9adncaGko1Qu3P9nZ2dnUU7-WWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36266 |
On 7/13/2021 6:08 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 16:55, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim >>>>>>>>>>> that H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am asking >>>>>>>>> whether it halts. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is because >>>>>>>> its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution >>>>>>>> suspended. This does not count as halting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is >>>>>>> an admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> André >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. >>>>>> When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its >>>>>> input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >>>>> >>>>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I >>>>> was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to H(P, >>>>> P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >>>> >>>> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. >>> >>> There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the >>> third element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth element. >>> What you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal infinite in >>> any numbering system of which I am aware. >>> >>>>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >>>> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never >>>> halts. >>> >>> If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is *not* >>> a decider. >>> >>> A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. >>> >>> André >>> >>> >> >> You are simply making sure to not pay attention. >> You do this with very intentional disrespect. > > To what, exactly, am I not paying attention? > > On the one hand, you claim to have created a (partial) halt decider. > > On the other hand, you claim that this (partial) halt decider *fails to > halt* on the one input you claim to care about. > > This is contradiction, plain and simple. > > André > > When the halt decider freaking forces its input to stop so that it can freaking report that its input never halts the input never halts and the freaking halt decider is freaking correct. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 18:20 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <sclajl$1st$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36269 |
On 2021-07-13 17:50, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 6:08 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 16:55, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim >>>>>>>>>>>> that H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am >>>>>>>>>> asking whether it halts. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is >>>>>>>>> because its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution >>>>>>>>> suspended. This does not count as halting. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That is >>>>>>>> an admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> André >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. >>>>>>> When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its >>>>>>> input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >>>>>> >>>>>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and I >>>>>> was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to >>>>>> H(P, P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >>>>> >>>>> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. >>>> >>>> There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the >>>> third element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth element. >>>> What you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal infinite in >>>> any numbering system of which I am aware. >>>> >>>>>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >>>>> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never >>>>> halts. >>>> >>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is >>>> *not* a decider. >>>> >>>> A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. >>>> >>>> André >>>> >>>> >>> >>> You are simply making sure to not pay attention. >>> You do this with very intentional disrespect. >> >> To what, exactly, am I not paying attention? >> >> On the one hand, you claim to have created a (partial) halt decider. >> >> On the other hand, you claim that this (partial) halt decider *fails >> to halt* on the one input you claim to care about. >> >> This is contradiction, plain and simple. >> >> André >> >> > > When the halt decider freaking forces its input to stop so that it can > freaking report that its input never halts the input never halts and the > freaking halt decider is freaking correct. Whether the computation given to the halt decider as an input halts is a completely separate question from whether the halt decider itself halts. Above I asked whether H(P, P) halts, i.e. whether the *halt decider* halts. You claimed it does not. I was pretty clear that I was *not* asking about its input, but about the decider itself. You stuck by your claim that H(P, P) does not halt even after I clarified this, but every time you try to justify your answer you revert to talking about the input rather than the decider. So did you completely misunderstand my question, or are you really maintaining that the halt decider itself fails to halt? André -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 19:32 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <v-6dnUB5wJAsrXP9nZ2dnUU7-InNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36272 |
On 7/13/2021 7:20 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2021-07-13 17:50, olcott wrote: >> On 7/13/2021 6:08 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2021-07-13 16:55, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>> On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim >>>>>>>>>>>>> that H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am >>>>>>>>>>> asking whether it halts. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is >>>>>>>>>> because its infinitely nested simulation has had its execution >>>>>>>>>> suspended. This does not count as halting. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That >>>>>>>>> is an admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> André >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. >>>>>>>> When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its >>>>>>>> input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting executions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and >>>>>>> I was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to >>>>>>> H(P, P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >>>>>> >>>>>> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. >>>>> >>>>> There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the >>>>> third element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth >>>>> element. What you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal >>>>> infinite in any numbering system of which I am aware. >>>>> >>>>>>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >>>>>> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus never >>>>>> halts. >>>>> >>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is >>>>> *not* a decider. >>>>> >>>>> A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. >>>>> >>>>> André >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> You are simply making sure to not pay attention. >>>> You do this with very intentional disrespect. >>> >>> To what, exactly, am I not paying attention? >>> >>> On the one hand, you claim to have created a (partial) halt decider. >>> >>> On the other hand, you claim that this (partial) halt decider *fails >>> to halt* on the one input you claim to care about. >>> >>> This is contradiction, plain and simple. >>> >>> André >>> >>> >> >> When the halt decider freaking forces its input to stop so that it can >> freaking report that its input never halts the input never halts and >> the freaking halt decider is freaking correct. > > Whether the computation given to the halt decider as an input halts is a > completely separate question from whether the halt decider itself halts. > Yet when I don't explain them both together you intentionally disrespectfully "forget" what I just said. > Above I asked whether H(P, P) halts, i.e. whether the *halt decider* > halts. You claimed it does not. I was pretty clear that I was *not* Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts > asking about its input, but about the decider itself. You stuck by your > claim that H(P, P) does not halt even after I clarified this, but every > time you try to justify your answer you revert to talking about the > input rather than the decider. > The halt decider halts The halt decider halts The halt decider halts The halt decider halts The halt decider halts > So did you completely misunderstand my question, or are you really > maintaining that the halt decider itself fails to halt? > > André > You are a freaking jackass. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-13 19:02 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <scld3o$vi5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #36274 |
On 2021-07-13 18:32, olcott wrote: > On 7/13/2021 7:20 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2021-07-13 17:50, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/13/2021 6:08 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2021-07-13 16:55, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/13/2021 5:44 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>> On 2021-07-13 16:21, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 11:11 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:43, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:36 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 09:33, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 10:08 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-13 08:42, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/13/2021 8:57 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem to be entirely ignoring my question. Do you claim >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that H(P, P) halts? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I claim that H(P,P) always correctly decides that its input >>>>>>>>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This remains true no matter what happens after H(P,P) is >>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly decided. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Once again, you are evading the question. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Does H(P, P) halt? I am not asking what it decides. I am >>>>>>>>>>>> asking whether it halts. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P) never halts. If H(P,P) ever stops running this is >>>>>>>>>>> because its infinitely nested simulation has had its >>>>>>>>>>> execution suspended. This does not count as halting. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then it cannot return an answer. That >>>>>>>>>> is an admission that you don't have a decider at all. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> André >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> H forces its input to stop running so that H remains a decider. >>>>>>>>> When H forces its input to stop running this does not make its >>>>>>>>> input halt. Aborted simulations do not count as halting >>>>>>>>> executions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I never claimed that aborting was the equivalent of halting, and >>>>>>>> I was quite clear above that I wasn't talking about the input to >>>>>>>> H(P, P) but to the computation H(P, P) itself. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> These are all elements of the same infinite chain. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is no infinite chain. If you suspend the simulation at the >>>>>> third element, then there is no fourth, fifth, sixth,...nth >>>>>> element. What you have is a chain of three. Three does not equal >>>>>> infinite in any numbering system of which I am aware. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Above you state that H(P, P) doesn't halt. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes I am saying that H(P,P) stops running only because the third >>>>>>> element of its infinite invocation sequence is aborted, thus >>>>>>> never halts. >>>>>> >>>>>> If H(P, P) never halts, then H *cannot* return an answer and is >>>>>> *not* a decider. >>>>>> >>>>>> A decider, by definition, is a TM which is *guaranteed* to halt. >>>>>> >>>>>> André >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You are simply making sure to not pay attention. >>>>> You do this with very intentional disrespect. >>>> >>>> To what, exactly, am I not paying attention? >>>> >>>> On the one hand, you claim to have created a (partial) halt decider. >>>> >>>> On the other hand, you claim that this (partial) halt decider *fails >>>> to halt* on the one input you claim to care about. >>>> >>>> This is contradiction, plain and simple. >>>> >>>> André >>>> >>>> >>> >>> When the halt decider freaking forces its input to stop so that it >>> can freaking report that its input never halts the input never halts >>> and the freaking halt decider is freaking correct. >> >> Whether the computation given to the halt decider as an input halts is >> a completely separate question from whether the halt decider itself >> halts. >> > > Yet when I don't explain them both together you intentionally > disrespectfully "forget" what I just said. > >> Above I asked whether H(P, P) halts, i.e. whether the *halt decider* >> halts. You claimed it does not. I was pretty clear that I was *not* > > Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts > Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts > Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts > Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts > Even though P is forced to stop running P never halts But I never *asked* about P above >> asking about its input, but about the decider itself. You stuck by >> your claim that H(P, P) does not halt even after I clarified this, but >> every time you try to justify your answer you revert to talking about >> the input rather than the decider. >> > > The halt decider halts > The halt decider halts > The halt decider halts > The halt decider halts > The halt decider halts So then why did you keep insisting it did not? But this then draws attention to the fundamental inconsistency in your reasoning that I was attempting to point out to you. You acknowledge that H(P, P) is forced to suspend its input, but that H (that halt decider) still halts. But when you run P(P) as an *independent* computation, the *outermost* P acts exactly like the H in H(P, P). It starts a simulation of P(P) which it then suspends after the third instance of recursion. So if the outermost H in H(P, P) halts, then the outermost P in P(P) must *also* halt. But this contradicts the claims of your H(P, P). You have to apply your logic consistently. In P(P), the *simulations* of P(P) are suspended (just as they are in H(P, P), but the outermost P which is *not* part of that simulation, but rather is the thing doing the simulating *does* come to a halt. That things (according to you) don't halt in your 'simulation' but do halt as independent computations illustrates that the logic of your 'simulating halt decider' is fundamentally broken. -- To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail service.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.theory
csiph-web