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 13 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 17 Next page →
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 21:01 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <9d1fc3f8-3e24-4573-87ac-0a5ab7d25279n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36022 |
you really need to learn what azioms are a z i o m s o k the above is provable from ezisting tenets of computational theory a z i o m s o k has business being called an aziom //false and anything here but when we ask whether p(p) halts we are asking specifically about the computation p(p) we are asking about some p in my language i rewrite the above in more purely monotone form as derived from below +++ You really need to learn what 'axioms' are. If the above is provable from existing tenets of computational theory, then it has no business being called an axiom. If it isn't, and you're introducing something new as an axiom, then you're no longer talking about the same computational theory that the halting problem is part of. But when we ask whether P(P) halts, we're asking specifically about the computation P(P). We're not asking about 'some P'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 21:17 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <67f49bfd-5604-462c-a87f-a9b4a33c5280n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #36024 |
current news on npr i recommend the u n to distribute legal pot in haiti including columbian pot the best stifle cough reflez for betterp results acyclic dear biden i am theologically opposed to antitrust legislation competition between china and america is temporarily banned while the mutual support agreement between two superpowers in case one of us collapses the other pledges honest recovery support while defeat the heat is being well planned the chinese shall very much like potatoes with melted butter and ketchup or soy sauce potatoes really cheap knee how ma
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 23:24 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) [ pathological self-reference(Olcott 2004) ] |
| Message-ID | <Z9GdnVEBJYtivXT9nZ2dnUU7-XednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #36024 |
On 7/9/2021 11:01 PM, Daniel Pehoushek wrote: > you really need to learn > what azioms are > a z i o m s o k > > the above is provable from ezisting tenets of computational theory > a z i o m s o k has business being called an aziom > > //false and anything here > > but when we ask whether p(p) halts > we are asking specifically about the computation p(p) > we are asking about some p > > in my language i rewrite the above > in more purely monotone form > as derived from below > > +++ > > You really need to learn what 'axioms' are. > > If the above is provable from existing tenets of computational theory, > then it has no business being called an axiom. > > If it isn't, and you're introducing something new as an axiom, then > you're no longer talking about the same computational theory that the > halting problem is part of. > > But when we ask whether P(P) halts, we're asking specifically about the > computation P(P). We're not asking about 'some P'. > One of the invocations of H(P,P) specified by the infinitely nested simulation of P(P) must be aborted. -- 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 | 2021-07-08 23:50 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) |
| Message-ID | <RHPFI.5219$r21.3168@fx38.iad> |
| In reply to | #35958 |
On 7/8/21 9:07 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/8/2021 5:52 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes: >> >>> On 7/8/2021 11:07 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting >>>>> problem halt deciding... >>>> We can know it isn't because you said it isn't: >>>> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem >>>> set of >>>> non-halting computations *and a few more*." (emphasis mine) >>> >>> My earlier statement is corrected below: >> >> So right up until a few days ago you knew your "adapted" criterion >> defined different accept and reject set to the halting problem and you >> were just pretending they were the same. >> > > The words have continually gotten clearer in my mind. > > [Halt Deciding Axiom] When the pure simulation of the machine > description ⟨P⟩ of a machine P on its input I never halts we know that > P(I) never halts. Every input that never halts while the simulating halt > decider remains a pure simulator is an input that never halts. > > A non-halting input is an input that would never halt without > interference by the simulating halt decider. If the halt decider merely > watches what the input program does and can see that it will never halt, > then it can stop simulating this input and report that it never halts. > > The key thing here is that the pathological self-reference(olcott 2004) > is eliminated from the halting problem when the simulating halt decider > simply watches what its input does without any interference > what-so-ever. When the simulating halt decider does this then it can > ignore its own behavior in its halt status analysis, thus eliminating > the confounding feedback loop. Except that since H WILL eventual abort the program it is simulating, it must take the fact that the copyies of itself will do the same thing. You don't, therefore you get the wrong answer. FAIL. > > Halting Problem Final Conclusion > Peter Olcott Sep 5, 2004, 11:21:57 AM > > The Liar Paradox can be shown to be nothing more than > a incorrectly formed statement because of its pathological > self-reference. The Halting Problem can only exist because > of this same sort of pathological self-reference. > https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/RO9Z9eCabeE/m/Ka8-xS2rdEEJ The 'self reference' isn't paradoxical. H^ has a definite halting behavior, there IS a right answer to whether it will halt or not, and another Halting decider can be able to produce this answer, at least as long as H does give some answer (which will be wrong) for H(H^,H^). H's problem is that it must be fully defined before H^ is created, and thus H^ has the advantage of knowing everything about it, so it can confound it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-08 23:43 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V4) |
| Message-ID | <TBPFI.15$3T.11@fx26.iad> |
| In reply to | #35950 |
On 7/8/21 12:24 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/8/2021 11:07 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes: >> >>> We can know that my halt deciding criteria is the same as the halting >>> problem halt deciding... >> >> We can know it isn't because you said it isn't: >> >> "This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of >> non-halting computations *and a few more*." (emphasis mine) >> > > My earlier statement is corrected below: > > [Axiom] When the pure simulation of the machine description ⟨P⟩ of a > machine P on its input I never halts we know that P(I) never halts. > > The second half of above criteria is the same criteria that the > conventional halting problem proofs use. It is known to be > computationally equivalent to the first half. > > When we apply the first half of that criteria to the set of halting > computations using a simulating halt decider it decides that they halt. > > When we apply the first half of that criteria to the set of non-halting > computations using a simulating halt decider it decides that they do not > halt. > > When we apply the first half of that criteria to the set of halting > problem proof counter-example templates using a simulating halt decider > it decides that they do not halt. > Except that you apply it WRONG, as you assume that H will NEVER abort a computation, then you let it. False Premsie, Unsound logic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-08 23:40 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <5zPFI.7977$rr3.4675@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #35939 |
On 7/8/21 8:58 AM, olcott wrote: > On 7/8/2021 5:58 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/7/21 11:10 PM, olcott wrote: >> >>> Global H aborts P(P) as if P(P) was a divide by zero error. >>> >> >> Then your system is NOT Turing Complete. >> >> Please explain this in terms of what actually happened to the Turing >> Machine P in terms of Turing Behavior? >> > > A global halt decider works just like the local halt decider except that > every computation is its input, thus P(P) is aborted. Which means you universe isn't Turing Complete, as not all programs are supposed to be run under the control of a halt decideer. PERIOD> > >> There IS no such this as a divide by zero error in fundamental Turing >> Machines. >> > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 20:17 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <jurFI.399$7k7.71@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #35881 |
On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: > > No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) > halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local > (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational environment, and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing Machines. ' This is a DIRECT effect of having a 'global' halt decider. That just does NOT exist in the universe of Turing machines.] PERIOD. DEFINITION. END OF STATEMENT.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 20:31 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <u7udnbUaqJPgyHv9nZ2dnUU7-SvNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35907 |
On 7/7/2021 7:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: >> >> No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) >> halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local >> (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. > > Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational environment, > and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing > Machines. So if the the halt decider is a Universal Turing machine (UTM) that simulates the execution of its inputs as the basis for its halting decision then this is not based on a real Turing machine? Is sounds to me like you are trying to say that some black cats are not cats that are black. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 21:51 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <iSsFI.8069$dp5.3769@fx48.iad> |
| In reply to | #35916 |
On 7/7/21 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/7/2021 7:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: >>> >>> No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) >>> halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local >>> (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. >> >> Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational environment, >> and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing >> Machines. > > So if the the halt decider is a Universal Turing machine (UTM) that > simulates the execution of its inputs as the basis for its halting > decision then this is not based on a real Turing machine? If your decider IS a UTM, then it must never halt a non-halting computation, and thus doesn't answer for H^. If there is a GLOBAL halt decider in your computational environment that aborts supposed Turing Machines that are NOT being run under your Halt Decider, then your computational environment is NOT Turing Complete, and thus you can't use it to argue about Turing Machines. > Is sounds to me like you are trying to say that some black cats are not > cats that are black. > No, I am saying that the presence of a global halt decider in your system means you aren't allowing all 'cats' to exist, and in particular, it is disallowing one of the machines specifically called out in the proof you are working on because the global decider is BROKEN.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 21:07 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <xJGdnZWsOeR3wHv9nZ2dnUU7-TPNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35918 |
On 7/7/2021 8:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/7/21 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 7/7/2021 7:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> >>>> No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) >>>> halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local >>>> (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. >>> >>> Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational environment, >>> and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing >>> Machines. >> >> So if the the halt decider is a Universal Turing machine (UTM) that >> simulates the execution of its inputs as the basis for its halting >> decision then this is not based on a real Turing machine? > > > If your decider IS a UTM, then it must never halt a non-halting > computation, and thus doesn't answer for H^. > So damned nit picky. The freaking halt decider is freaking based on a freaking UTM. > If there is a GLOBAL halt decider in your computational environment that > aborts supposed Turing Machines that are NOT being run under your Halt > Decider, then your computational environment is NOT Turing Complete, and > thus you can't use it to argue about Turing Machines. > In the environment that I propose it is not possible for any input to avoid halt deciding analysis. >> Is sounds to me like you are trying to say that some black cats are not >> cats that are black. >> > > No, I am saying that the presence of a global halt decider in your > system means you aren't allowing all 'cats' to exist, and in particular, > it is disallowing one of the machines specifically called out in the > proof you are working on because the global decider is BROKEN. > How so? -- 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 | 2021-07-07 22:51 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <yKtFI.715$XI4.271@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #35921 |
On 7/7/21 10:07 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/7/2021 8:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/7/21 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/7/2021 7:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> >>>>> No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) >>>>> halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local >>>>> (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. >>>> >>>> Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational >>>> environment, >>>> and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing >>>> Machines. >>> >>> So if the the halt decider is a Universal Turing machine (UTM) that >>> simulates the execution of its inputs as the basis for its halting >>> decision then this is not based on a real Turing machine? >> >> >> If your decider IS a UTM, then it must never halt a non-halting >> computation, and thus doesn't answer for H^. >> > > So damned nit picky. The freaking halt decider is freaking based on a > freaking UTM. And if it isn't a black cat you can't call it one. > >> If there is a GLOBAL halt decider in your computational environment that >> aborts supposed Turing Machines that are NOT being run under your Halt >> Decider, then your computational environment is NOT Turing Complete, and >> thus you can't use it to argue about Turing Machines. >> > > In the environment that I propose it is not possible for any input to > avoid halt deciding analysis. Right, so it isn't Turing Complete, so the any H proposed here CAN'T be given 'any' Turing Machine. Halt Deciding for Non-Turing Complete system is a solved problem. > >>> Is sounds to me like you are trying to say that some black cats are not >>> cats that are black. >>> >> >> No, I am saying that the presence of a global halt decider in your >> system means you aren't allowing all 'cats' to exist, and in particular, >> it is disallowing one of the machines specifically called out in the >> proof you are working on because the global decider is BROKEN. >> > > How so? > Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that can be given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow certain machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent machine to halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you aren't really proving anything new.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 22:04 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <4-GdnbHNB-Df9nv9nZ2dnUU7-Y-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35924 |
On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/7/21 10:07 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 7/7/2021 8:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 7/7/21 9:31 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/7/2021 7:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 7/7/21 3:51 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> No non-halting input can avoid being analyzed by the global (partial) >>>>>> halt decider. Only programs that are input parameters to the local >>>>>> (partial) halt decider H are analyzed by H. >>>>> >>>>> Then you are working in a non-Turing Complete computational >>>>> environment, >>>>> and thus NONE of your proofs matter, because you don't have REAL Turing >>>>> Machines. >>>> >>>> So if the the halt decider is a Universal Turing machine (UTM) that >>>> simulates the execution of its inputs as the basis for its halting >>>> decision then this is not based on a real Turing machine? >>> >>> >>> If your decider IS a UTM, then it must never halt a non-halting >>> computation, and thus doesn't answer for H^. >>> >> >> So damned nit picky. The freaking halt decider is freaking based on a >> freaking UTM. > > And if it isn't a black cat you can't call it one. > > >> >>> If there is a GLOBAL halt decider in your computational environment that >>> aborts supposed Turing Machines that are NOT being run under your Halt >>> Decider, then your computational environment is NOT Turing Complete, and >>> thus you can't use it to argue about Turing Machines. >>> >> >> In the environment that I propose it is not possible for any input to >> avoid halt deciding analysis. > > Right, so it isn't Turing Complete, so the any H proposed here CAN'T be > given 'any' Turing Machine. Halt Deciding for Non-Turing Complete system > is a solved problem. > >> >>>> Is sounds to me like you are trying to say that some black cats are not >>>> cats that are black. >>>> >>> >>> No, I am saying that the presence of a global halt decider in your >>> system means you aren't allowing all 'cats' to exist, and in particular, >>> it is disallowing one of the machines specifically called out in the >>> proof you are working on because the global decider is BROKEN. >>> >> >> How so? >> > > Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that can be > given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow certain > machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof > isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent machine to > halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you > aren't really proving anything new. > Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any input? -- 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 | 2021-07-08 07:02 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <cXAFI.13019$Vv6.3635@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #35927 |
On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that can be >> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow certain >> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof >> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent machine to >> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you >> aren't really proving anything new. >> > > Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any input? > > Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in an infinite behavior, These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental principles, thus your system is broken.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-08 08:29 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] |
| Message-ID | <waedndb5maFOYHv9nZ2dnUU7-T_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35935 |
On 7/8/2021 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > >>> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that can be >>> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow certain >>> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof >>> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent machine to >>> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you >>> aren't really proving anything new. >>> >> >> Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any input? >> >> > > Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in > an infinite behavior, H does not execute any machines that never halt until they halt because they never halt. > These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. > There is nothing improper about them. > Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. > > H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental > principles, thus your system is broken. > The global halt decider would abort H(⟨Ĥ⟩, ⟨Ĥ⟩) its input before its input ever reached either final state. H and the embedded halt decider are both designed to abort their input as soon as they detect that the pure simulation of their input would never halt. A global halt decider is always one step ahead of any input. A local halt decider is sometimes one step behind its input. The issue of a computation halting even though the halt decider decides that it never halts is an issue of timing. The halt decider is only required to get its inputs correctly. If the later part of a non-halting computation is presented to the halt decider it does what it is supposed to do and aborts this input. It can't do anything with the earlier part because the earlier part was not submitted as input. A global halt decider eliminates this issue. -- 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 | 2021-07-09 00:05 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] |
| Message-ID | <pWPFI.5220$r21.635@fx38.iad> |
| In reply to | #35941 |
On 7/8/21 9:29 AM, olcott wrote: > On 7/8/2021 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> >>>> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that >>>> can be >>>> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow >>>> certain >>>> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof >>>> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent >>>> machine to >>>> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you >>>> aren't really proving anything new. >>>> >>> >>> Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any >>> input? >>> >>> >> >> Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in >> an infinite behavior, > > H does not execute any machines that never halt until they halt because > they never halt. > >> These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. >> > > There is nothing improper about them. > >> Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. >> >> H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental >> principles, thus your system is broken. >> > > The global halt decider would abort H(⟨Ĥ⟩, ⟨Ĥ⟩) its input before its > input ever reached either final state. And thus your system can not be used to figure out if H is correct or not, because it stops the machine before the answer is REALLY proven. > > H and the embedded halt decider are both designed to abort their input > as soon as they detect that the pure simulation of their input would > never halt. A global halt decider is always one step ahead of any input. > A local halt decider is sometimes one step behind its input. > > The issue of a computation halting even though the halt decider decides > that it never halts is an issue of timing. > > The halt decider is only required to get its inputs correctly. If the > later part of a non-halting computation is presented to the halt decider > it does what it is supposed to do and aborts this input. > > It can't do anything with the earlier part because the earlier part was > not submitted as input. A global halt decider eliminates this issue. > Right, The global decider says that a machine that WOULD come to a HALT if let run, gets aborted and not allowed to finish, thus it is WRONG, as the computation is REALLY HALTING, because if given enough (but still a finite number) of step, it would halt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-08 23:27 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] |
| Message-ID | <cuCdnXBzVYGyTXr9nZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35969 |
On 7/8/2021 11:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/8/21 9:29 AM, olcott wrote: >> On 7/8/2021 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> >>>>> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that >>>>> can be >>>>> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow >>>>> certain >>>>> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you proof >>>>> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent >>>>> machine to >>>>> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, so you >>>>> aren't really proving anything new. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any >>>> input? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in >>> an infinite behavior, >> >> H does not execute any machines that never halt until they halt because >> they never halt. >> >>> These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. >>> >> >> There is nothing improper about them. >> >>> Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. >>> >>> H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental >>> principles, thus your system is broken. >>> >> >> The global halt decider would abort H(⟨Ĥ⟩, ⟨Ĥ⟩) its input before its >> input ever reached either final state. > > And thus your system can not be used to figure out if H is correct or > not, because it stops the machine before the answer is REALLY proven. > >> >> H and the embedded halt decider are both designed to abort their input >> as soon as they detect that the pure simulation of their input would >> never halt. A global halt decider is always one step ahead of any input. >> A local halt decider is sometimes one step behind its input. >> >> The issue of a computation halting even though the halt decider decides >> that it never halts is an issue of timing. >> >> The halt decider is only required to get its inputs correctly. If the >> later part of a non-halting computation is presented to the halt decider >> it does what it is supposed to do and aborts this input. >> >> It can't do anything with the earlier part because the earlier part was >> not submitted as input. A global halt decider eliminates this issue. >> > > Right, The global decider says that a machine that WOULD come to a HALT > if let run, gets aborted and not allowed to finish, thus it is WRONG, as > the computation is REALLY HALTING, because if given enough (but still a > finite number) of step, it would halt. > I can discard the global halt deicider again. -- 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 | 2021-07-09 05:53 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] |
| Message-ID | <z0VFI.972$6j.274@fx04.iad> |
| In reply to | #35972 |
On 7/9/21 12:27 AM, olcott wrote: > On 7/8/2021 11:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/8/21 9:29 AM, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/8/2021 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that >>>>>> can be >>>>>> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow >>>>>> certain >>>>>> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you >>>>>> proof >>>>>> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent >>>>>> machine to >>>>>> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, >>>>>> so you >>>>>> aren't really proving anything new. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any >>>>> input? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in >>>> an infinite behavior, >>> >>> H does not execute any machines that never halt until they halt because >>> they never halt. >>> >>>> These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. >>>> >>> >>> There is nothing improper about them. >>> >>>> Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. >>>> >>>> H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental >>>> principles, thus your system is broken. >>>> >>> >>> The global halt decider would abort H(⟨Ĥ⟩, ⟨Ĥ⟩) its input before its >>> input ever reached either final state. >> >> And thus your system can not be used to figure out if H is correct or >> not, because it stops the machine before the answer is REALLY proven. >> >>> >>> H and the embedded halt decider are both designed to abort their input >>> as soon as they detect that the pure simulation of their input would >>> never halt. A global halt decider is always one step ahead of any input. >>> A local halt decider is sometimes one step behind its input. >>> >>> The issue of a computation halting even though the halt decider decides >>> that it never halts is an issue of timing. >>> >>> The halt decider is only required to get its inputs correctly. If the >>> later part of a non-halting computation is presented to the halt decider >>> it does what it is supposed to do and aborts this input. >>> >>> It can't do anything with the earlier part because the earlier part was >>> not submitted as input. A global halt decider eliminates this issue. >>> >> >> Right, The global decider says that a machine that WOULD come to a HALT >> if let run, gets aborted and not allowed to finish, thus it is WRONG, as >> the computation is REALLY HALTING, because if given enough (but still a >> finite number) of step, it would halt. >> > > I can discard the global halt deicider again. > It has ALWAYS been a failure, because it immediately make your system unsuitable for your proof. Removing it doesn't make your statement right, but at least you start with something you can talk about being able to run Turing Machine Equivalents. Without the Global Halt Decider, we can talk about what P(P) actually does, which is a required part of the proof, since that is what the question is about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-09 09:02 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) [ global halt decider ] |
| Message-ID | <doWdnZLz-M9By3X9nZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35975 |
On 7/9/2021 4:53 AM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 7/9/21 12:27 AM, olcott wrote: >> On 7/8/2021 11:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 7/8/21 9:29 AM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 7/8/2021 6:02 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 7/7/21 11:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/7/2021 9:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Because The Halting Problem proof is based on a machine that that >>>>>>> can be >>>>>>> given ANY Turing Machine, If you environment happens to disallow >>>>>>> certain >>>>>>> machines, and that machine happens to be the machine H^, then you >>>>>>> proof >>>>>>> isn't valid.It is quite possible to write a Turing Equivalent >>>>>>> machine to >>>>>>> halt decide many different sorts of non-Turing complete systems, >>>>>>> so you >>>>>>> aren't really proving anything new. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Where the Hell did you get the idea that this machine disallows any >>>>>> input? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sine your system does not proper execute any machine that it thinks in >>>>> an infinite behavior, >>>> >>>> H does not execute any machines that never halt until they halt because >>>> they never halt. >>>> >>>>> These machines don't exist as proper Turing Machines. >>>>> >>>> >>>> There is nothing improper about them. >>>> >>>>> Particularly since it gets some machines (like H^(H^)) wring. >>>>> >>>>> H^(H^) is EASILY proved to be halting for your H from fundamental >>>>> principles, thus your system is broken. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The global halt decider would abort H(⟨Ĥ⟩, ⟨Ĥ⟩) its input before its >>>> input ever reached either final state. >>> >>> And thus your system can not be used to figure out if H is correct or >>> not, because it stops the machine before the answer is REALLY proven. >>> >>>> >>>> H and the embedded halt decider are both designed to abort their input >>>> as soon as they detect that the pure simulation of their input would >>>> never halt. A global halt decider is always one step ahead of any input. >>>> A local halt decider is sometimes one step behind its input. >>>> >>>> The issue of a computation halting even though the halt decider decides >>>> that it never halts is an issue of timing. >>>> >>>> The halt decider is only required to get its inputs correctly. If the >>>> later part of a non-halting computation is presented to the halt decider >>>> it does what it is supposed to do and aborts this input. >>>> >>>> It can't do anything with the earlier part because the earlier part was >>>> not submitted as input. A global halt decider eliminates this issue. >>>> >>> >>> Right, The global decider says that a machine that WOULD come to a HALT >>> if let run, gets aborted and not allowed to finish, thus it is WRONG, as >>> the computation is REALLY HALTING, because if given enough (but still a >>> finite number) of step, it would halt. >>> >> >> I can discard the global halt deicider again. >> > It has ALWAYS been a failure, because it immediately make your system > unsuitable for your proof. > > Removing it doesn't make your statement right, but at least you start > with something you can talk about being able to run Turing Machine > Equivalents. > > Without the Global Halt Decider, we can talk about what P(P) actually > does, which is a required part of the proof, since that is what the > question is about. > [Halt Deciding Axiom] When the pure simulation of the machine description ⟨P⟩ of a machine P on its input I never halts we know that P(I) never halts. Because the pure simulation of P(P) never halts this proves that P(P) meets the conventional definition of a computation that never halts. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-07 20:59 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (V3) |
| Message-ID | <87sg0p51zl.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #35866 |
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> On 7/7/2021 10:32 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 7/6/2021 8:56 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>> No one is interested in the POOH problem. For the halting problem,
>>>> H(P,P) is correct only when
>>>> H(P,P) != 0 and P(P) halts, or
>>>> H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) does not halt.
>>>> Neither is the case. That H might be correct for some other decision
>>>> problem is not relevant.
>>>>
>>>
>>> // Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
>>> void P(u32 x)
>>> {
>>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>>> if (Input_Halts)
>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> u32 Input_Halts = H((u32)P, (u32)P);
>>> Output("Input_Halts = ", Input_Halts);
>>> }
>>>
>>> When the simulation of the Turing machine description ⟨P⟩ of a Turing
>>> machine P on input I never halts we know that P(I) never halts.
>> P(P) halts. Any simulation of P(P) halts. H(P,P) == 0 is wrong about
>> the halting of P(P).
>>
>>> Simulating halt deciders must abort their simulation of all inputs
>>> where the pure simulation of this input would never halt.
>> That is, indeed, one way in which they can be wrong. Every TM is wrong
>> about some instances.
>
> H acts as a pure x86 simulator until its input demonstrates
> non-halting behavior. It is common knowledge that when-so-ever the
> pure simulation of the machine description of a machine never halts on
> its input that this logically entails that this machine never halts on
> its input. This proves that H uses the same halting criteria as the
> halting problem.
P(P) halts. H(P,P) == 0 is wrong about the halting of P(P).
You know that your notion of halting is not what the world calls
halting. That's why you are clear that you have "adapted" (AKA changed)
the criterion. What's more, you accept that the set of non-POOH
computations is a proper superset of the non-halting computations,
i.e. that it includes some halting computations:
"This maps to every element of the conventional halting problem set of
non-halting computations *and a few more*" (emphasis mine)[1]
If you are not deceiving us, you must be deceiving yourself to a
remarkable degree; to be able to say that you have adapted the criteria
to get different accept and reject sets, while simultaneously saying
that you have proved the criteria to be the same.
This is what you've ended up with two and half years after the Great
Delusion? Not two "actual Turing machines" "exactly and precisely as in
Linz" but a pile of x86 that gets the halting of the key computation
wrong along with another pile of waffle saying that, no, it's the right
answer because you've "adapted" the criterion for halting while keeping
it the same.
Please, please, go and do something else. They world is full of
wonderful things. This isn't one of them.
[1] Message-ID: <AqOdnZFydIg2VX79nZ2dnUU7-WnNnZ2d@giganews.com>
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-05 23:15 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct? (Ben's double-talk does not work) |
| Message-ID | <yc-dndMyT5lRRX79nZ2dnUU7-f3NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #35779 |
On 7/5/2021 6:15 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 7/5/2021 4:34 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> For anyone interested, here's the answer to the question posed in the
>>> subject line: How do we know that H(P,P)==0 is correct?
>>>
>>> We know that H(M,I) == 0 (false) is correct if, and only if, M(I) is not
>>> a halting (finite) computation.
>>>
>>> But PO rejects the very definition of a halting decider: a TM that
>>> accepts exactly those strings that represent finite computations, and
>>> rejects all others.
>>>
>>> Instead, a PO "Other-Halting" decider also rejects some strings that
>>> represent finite computations, specifically P(P) where P is hat(H), a
>>> function defined in terms of H like this:
>>> def hat(h):
>>> def p(x):
>>> if h(x, x):
>>> while True: pass
>>> return p
>>>
>>> For a POOH decider, H(hat(H), hat(H)) = False is correct, despite
>>> hat(H)(hat(H)) being a halting computation. No one except PO is
>>> interested in the POOH problem.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, everyone is interested in halting, but the
>>> computation D(hat(D), hat(D)) shows that no D computes the halting
>>> function.
>>
>> Try and get your double-talk around this:
>>
>> void P(u32 x)
>> {
>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>> if (Input_Halts)
>> HERE: goto HERE;
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> P((u32)P);
>> }
>>
>> Because the above computation must be aborted at some point or it
>> never halts the above computation is a non-halting computation.
>
> It is a halting computation because it halts. The fact that P(P) halts
> is not in dispute.
>
> Nor is it a matter of dispute that your POOH decider, H, returns H(P,P)
> == 0 and so P(P) is a non-POOH computation. The only dispute is that
> you think someone might be interested in the POOH problem.
>
> (For obvious reasons, you resist giving the property you claim H is
> deciding a proper name. I'm not entirely sold on "PO Other Halting" but
> you won't suggest a better alternative.)
>
On the basis that we know that every UTM(P,I) never halts defines the
exact same set of computations that must be aborted by a simulating halt
decider which defines the exact same set of computations P(I) that never
halt we can know that any input to a simulating halt decider that never
halts unless its simulation is aborted is a non-halting computation.
Because we know that a simulating halt decider only simulates its input
until after it has made its halt status decision we can know that H can
ignore its own address range in its execution traces.
Because the x86 execution trace of P on input P provides no possible
escape from infinitely nested simulation and we can ignore the execution
trace of H then we can know that H must abort its simulation of P on the
basis of the sixteen lines of P:
_P()
[00000b25](01) 55 push ebp
[00000b26](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00000b28](01) 51 push ecx
[00000b29](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
[00000b2c](01) 50 push eax
[00000b2d](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
[00000b30](01) 51 push ecx
[00000b31](05) e81ffeffff call 00000955 // call H
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation at Machine Address:b25
...[00000b25][002116fe][00211702](01) 55 push ebp // P1
...[00000b26][002116fe][00211702](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
...[00000b28][002116fa][002016ce](01) 51 push ecx
...[00000b29][002116fa][002016ce](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
...[00000b2c][002116f6][00000b25](01) 50 push eax
...[00000b2d][002116f6][00000b25](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
...[00000b30][002116f2][00000b25](01) 51 push ecx
...[00000b31][002116ee][00000b36](05) e81ffeffff call 00000955 // H1
...[00000b25][0025c126][0025c12a](01) 55 push ebp // P2
...[00000b26][0025c126][0025c12a](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
...[00000b28][0025c122][0024c0f6](01) 51 push ecx
...[00000b29][0025c122][0024c0f6](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
...[00000b2c][0025c11e][00000b25](01) 50 push eax
...[00000b2d][0025c11e][00000b25](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
...[00000b30][0025c11a][00000b25](01) 51 push ecx
...[00000b31][0025c116][00000b36](05) e81ffeffff call 00000955 // H2
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
--
Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre
minds." Einstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 17 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 … 17 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.theory
csiph-web