Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #113296 > unrolled thread
| Started by | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-02-07 17:13 -0600 |
| Last post | 2025-02-13 07:17 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 490 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.theory
Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-07 17:13 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-07 18:55 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-07 19:18 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-08 10:54 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 08:43 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-08 22:49 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 00:04 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-09 09:09 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 09:15 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-09 16:53 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 10:37 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-09 17:43 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 10:49 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 12:05 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-09 19:47 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 13:00 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-09 20:30 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 13:33 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 14:37 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-10 09:27 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-10 11:05 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-09 19:42 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 13:57 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 18:05 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-10 13:15 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-09 19:39 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 13:57 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 18:05 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 17:22 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 19:19 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-10 11:18 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-10 06:04 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-10 07:41 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-10 12:57 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-09 19:34 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 08:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 09:39 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-08 17:29 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-09 11:48 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 09:21 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-10 10:33 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-10 05:53 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-10 07:41 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-11 11:22 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-09 11:49 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-08 12:25 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-08 08:55 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-08 17:29 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-09 12:08 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 09:24 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-09 16:39 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-09 10:43 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-10 10:35 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-10 05:58 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-10 07:41 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-11 11:27 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-11 08:41 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-11 18:41 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-12 12:04 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-12 22:21 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-13 11:20 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-13 18:07 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-13 22:15 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-13 22:21 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-14 12:54 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 17:29 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-14 19:38 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-15 10:03 +0000
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 21:25 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 07:09 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 07:19 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-16 12:55 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 07:32 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2025-02-16 13:50 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 13:40 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-16 21:24 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-19 22:08 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-20 10:28 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 07:02 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-20 20:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-21 10:10 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 16:39 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 20:05 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-22 10:45 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:06 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 16:49 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:14 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-23 11:43 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:34 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 19:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-24 10:32 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:22 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 19:04 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:10 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 08:09 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 11:51 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 18:13 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-25 10:32 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-25 16:35 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 15:16 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 18:41 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 19:50 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 23:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:36 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 07:01 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-26 10:39 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-20 10:00 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 21:55 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 11:01 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:43 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:10 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:02 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 13:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:54 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 14:17 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 13:33 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 14:40 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 14:03 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 15:09 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 14:53 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 15:59 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 16:53 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 17:59 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 18:33 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 21:34 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:30 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 12:57 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 18:10 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 19:15 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 19:13 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 20:22 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 20:04 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 22:15 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 21:20 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 23:09 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 22:42 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 23:45 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 23:01 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 00:08 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 23:17 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 08:11 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 08:23 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 08:52 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 08:48 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 10:03 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 15:26 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-24 21:44 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:18 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 16:47 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:16 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:06 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:12 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 20:26 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:47 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 20:51 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:59 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 21:04 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 20:15 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 21:18 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 21:51 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 22:59 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 22:03 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 23:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 08:41 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 09:56 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 11:44 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 18:10 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 13:47 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 07:18 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 08:15 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 21:48 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 22:59 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 08:07 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-24 09:34 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:46 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 19:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 22:38 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 18:10 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-23 12:46 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:35 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 19:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-24 10:41 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:28 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 19:05 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:21 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 23:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 22:11 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 07:18 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-25 16:49 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 15:13 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN --- Saving Democracy Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-26 10:44 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 07:15 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- RECURSIVE CHAIN Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-20 07:19 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-14 08:21 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 17:32 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-14 19:38 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-15 10:02 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-14 10:58 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 06:40 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-14 08:21 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-14 14:49 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-14 17:33 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-14 19:38 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-15 09:17 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-15 10:00 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-15 10:49 +0200
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 19:13 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-15 20:38 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-16 11:35 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-25 18:13 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 12:01 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-25 18:07 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 12:25 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 18:41 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 20:09 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 23:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:39 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 07:04 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-26 10:25 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 13:49 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 14:46 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 16:17 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 17:40 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 21:53 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 21:50 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 17:14 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 21:52 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 21:38 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:45 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 21:54 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 23:08 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:14 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 08:22 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 08:27 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 09:43 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 19:43 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 18:41 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 20:05 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 23:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:44 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 07:09 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-26 10:58 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- COMPLETE PROOF "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-26 10:20 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-15 21:16 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 07:10 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-16 12:53 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 07:25 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 13:39 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 06:51 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-16 16:35 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 13:24 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-16 20:02 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 15:58 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-16 22:30 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 16:51 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-17 10:05 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 08:09 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-17 19:50 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-18 11:24 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 05:26 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-18 07:25 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 07:37 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-18 13:48 +0000
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 10:34 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-18 16:50 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-18 18:33 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 22:10 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-19 07:03 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-18 15:11 +0100
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 10:48 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-18 18:36 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-19 11:55 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-19 18:34 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-19 21:14 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-19 20:56 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-20 09:56 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 21:57 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 07:15 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-20 07:19 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2025-02-20 17:42 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-21 10:15 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-20 10:35 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 17:15 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 20:05 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-22 10:34 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:28 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 16:45 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:07 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 18:17 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 12:57 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 19:15 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 13:36 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-20 09:52 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 21:57 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-22 10:38 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:33 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- ONE POINT AT A TIME !!! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 07:15 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-18 18:32 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-18 22:08 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-19 07:41 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-19 18:38 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-19 21:14 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-19 07:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-19 11:01 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-19 18:31 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-19 21:14 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-20 10:38 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 15:31 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-02-20 22:38 +0000
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-20 18:25 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-20 20:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-21 10:21 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 16:40 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 20:05 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2025-02-21 12:09 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 07:21 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 17:09 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 20:05 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 11:05 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:52 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 19:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 18:45 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 21:41 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:32 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 12:58 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 21:50 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 21:36 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 23:44 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-24 09:32 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:38 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 19:04 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 19:16 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 23:02 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 22:09 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 07:18 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 07:16 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 18:06 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 19:16 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-25 10:43 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 22:38 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-23 12:56 +0200
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:40 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 19:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-23 11:52 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:47 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-23 18:21 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 19:17 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 21:50 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 19:12 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference --- despicable dishonesty "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-25 11:02 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-20 20:12 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-21 10:18 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 16:35 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-21 20:05 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-22 11:04 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-22 10:11 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-22 22:38 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-23 12:59 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-23 11:44 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-23 19:12 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-24 10:47 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-24 17:36 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-24 19:04 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-25 10:47 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-25 16:59 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 15:12 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 18:41 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 20:13 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-25 23:21 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-25 22:50 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-26 10:48 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 08:49 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-26 15:52 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 22:40 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 07:41 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-27 10:36 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 13:06 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-27 20:20 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 17:18 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 09:53 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 18:56 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 21:00 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 18:04 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-28 08:46 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 18:51 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-03-01 11:24 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 10:01 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 19:05 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-03-01 11:38 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Failure to meet this challenge proves that all of my reviewers are wrong [2] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 11:04 -0600
Re: Failure to meet this challenge proves that all of my reviewers are wrong [2] joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-03-02 19:19 +0000
Re: Failure to meet this challenge proves that all of my reviewers are wrong [2] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 13:27 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-03-02 11:10 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 22:20 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-28 08:42 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-28 09:30 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 19:56 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-26 17:05 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 22:42 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 18:50 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 23:00 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 07:32 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 09:16 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-27 10:50 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 14:13 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 20:45 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 17:28 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-28 08:54 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 19:00 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-03-01 11:27 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 10:06 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 19:15 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 07:14 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-26 09:29 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 08:45 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-26 15:50 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 22:34 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 07:42 +0000
DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 09:26 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 15:55 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 14:25 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 20:42 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 17:21 -0600
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement Mr Flibble <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2025-02-27 22:42 +0000
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 10:09 +0100
Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-26 17:12 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 22:49 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-27 10:58 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 14:18 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-27 21:05 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 20:00 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-27 22:25 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-28 08:41 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 09:49 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-28 09:30 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-28 19:57 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-03-01 07:49 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-28 09:44 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-26 18:53 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-26 23:04 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-27 11:02 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-27 07:40 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-26 11:08 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-02-20 10:43 +0200
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-20 11:54 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-21 17:12 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-02-22 11:03 +0000
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-02-17 10:04 +0100
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 16:52 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 16:08 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-16 22:43 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-17 06:57 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-02-17 08:25 -0600
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-17 19:50 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-16 13:39 -0500
Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-02-13 07:17 -0500
Page 2 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 25 Next page →
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 11:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <b2cd69b9631d1a522739acfd63dc7ee9ea31918b@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113375 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:33:32 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 2/9/2025 1:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:00 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/9/2025 12:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:49 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it
>>>>>> investigates only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable
>>>>>> to process the call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>> Indeed, because HHH fails to simulate itself up to the end.
>>>> This is verified with:
>>>> int main() {
>>>> return HHH(main);
>>>> }
>>> There is no simulating itself to the end with the above example
>>> either.
>> It seems Olcott misses trivial facts. HHH simulates main, which calls
>> HHH, so HHH needs to simulate HHH. HHH is unable to complet the
>> simulation up to the end, because it
> specifies a computation that cannot possibly terminate normally.
Which is weird, considering that HHH is supposed to be a decider,
i.e. always terminate, both as the simulator and the simulated
program.
--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 19:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2e46169824dc521920f2d801e2abeb75e2956974@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113372 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:00:05 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 2/9/2025 12:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:49 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring
>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>
>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates
>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the
>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>
>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>
>> Indeed, because HHH fails to simulate itself up to the end.
>> This is verified with:
>> int main() {
>> return HHH(main);
>> }
>>
> There is no simulating itself to the end with the above example either.
> Apparently you do not understand the basic notion of recursion very
> well.
That’s the point. HHH doesn’t terminate.
--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 13:57 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <vob1bq$ptj9$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #113380 |
On 2/9/2025 1:42 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:00:05 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>> On 2/9/2025 12:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:49 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>
>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring
>>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates
>>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the
>>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>>
>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>
>>> Indeed, because HHH fails to simulate itself up to the end.
>>> This is verified with:
>>> int main() {
>>> return HHH(main);
>>> }
>>>
>> There is no simulating itself to the end with the above example either.
>> Apparently you do not understand the basic notion of recursion very
>> well.
> That’s the point. HHH doesn’t terminate.
>
Counter-factual.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 18:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <c0bcfecaad0ebb1976d23b481b738b9f4938a64d@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113383 |
On 2/9/25 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/9/2025 1:42 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:00:05 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 2/9/2025 12:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:49 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>
>>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring
>>>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates
>>>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the
>>>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, because HHH fails to simulate itself up to the end.
>>>> This is verified with:
>>>> int main() {
>>>> return HHH(main);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>> There is no simulating itself to the end with the above example either.
>>> Apparently you do not understand the basic notion of recursion very
>>> well.
>
>> That’s the point. HHH doesn’t terminate.
>>
> Counter-factual.
>
Then it is wrong, as if HHH returns 0, it returns 0 when DD calls it so
DD will terminate and HHH will just be wrong.
You need to decide if HHH does a correct simulation or is a decider.
It can't be both, as they are mutually exclusive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 13:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2a9c7546f22b90e8b0a5c5dca2c0e1c761f5853b@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113383 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:46 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 2/9/2025 1:42 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:00:05 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 2/9/2025 12:47 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:49 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>
>>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>>>>>>> Referring to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact.
>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!
>>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
>>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it
>>>>>> investigates only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable
>>>>>> to process the call from DD to HHH correctly.
>>>> Indeed, because HHH fails to simulate itself up to the end.
>>>> This is verified with:
>>>> int main() {
>>>> return HHH(main);
>>>> }
>>> There is no simulating itself to the end with the above example
>>> either.
>>> Apparently you do not understand the basic notion of recursion very
>>> well.
>> That’s the point. HHH doesn’t terminate.
> Counter-factual.
Then why does it report non-halting on itself?
--
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 19:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2fd02f81a1373810483d993525584bb583d91229@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113359 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>> >>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >> >> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >> call from DD to HHH correctly. > > DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated by > HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value > of the DD input to HHH. DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. DD simulated by HHH is the input to HHH(HHH(DD)). -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 13:57 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <vob1af$ptj9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #113379 |
On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: > Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: > >>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>> >>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>> >>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >> >> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated by >> HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value >> of the DD input to HHH. > > DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. > That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an entirely different execution trace. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 18:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <05bcc7feaa9fdc5b564c37cd17de82ea98ff25ac@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113382 |
On 2/9/25 2:57 PM, olcott wrote: > On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >> >>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>> >>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>> >>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>> >>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated by >>> HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value >>> of the DD input to HHH. >> >> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >> > > That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). > That DD has an entirely different execution trace. > What is different about it? Same code, so same program. Or, are you saying you LIED when you made the string representation for the input. You are just admitting that you are nothing but a lying FRAUD.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 17:22 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <vobdb7$s681$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #113389 |
On 2/9/2025 5:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 2/9/25 2:57 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>> >>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>>> >>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>>> >>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated by >>>> HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value >>>> of the DD input to HHH. >>> >>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >>> >> >> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). >> That DD has an entirely different execution trace. >> > > What is different about it? > *That DD has an entirely different execution trace* Do you know what an execution trace is? -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 19:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <13e38f5fceea3260535e48a5e3a9613392555003@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113392 |
On 2/9/25 6:22 PM, olcott wrote: > On 2/9/2025 5:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 2/9/25 2:57 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>>> >>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>>>> >>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD >>>>> simulated by >>>>> HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value >>>>> of the DD input to HHH. >>>> >>>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >>>> >>> >>> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). >>> That DD has an entirely different execution trace. >>> >> >> What is different about it? >> > > *That DD has an entirely different execution trace* > Do you know what an execution trace is? > SO it can't be the right string that describes it. And, what instruction, correctly simulated differed? Your previous answers were all about instructions that were NOT correcctly simulated. Sorry, your bluff is called, Put up or shut up. Failure to answer the call will be an admission of guilt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 11:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <59488994e22555dec69ca38789ce090e6c78ecb2@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113382 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:03 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >> >>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>> >>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>> >>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>> >>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated >>> by HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination >>> value of the DD input to HHH. >> >> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >> > That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an entirely > different execution trace. That is entirely due to how HHH chooses to missimulate it, namely by not calling itself, but a different version that doesn’t abort. Why do you not pass the same DD as an input to HHH? -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 06:04 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <vocq13$16c4e$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #113402 |
On 2/10/2025 5:18 AM, joes wrote: > Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:03 -0600 schrieb olcott: >> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>> >>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>>> >>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>>> >>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated >>>> by HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination >>>> value of the DD input to HHH. >>> >>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >>> >> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an entirely >> different execution trace. > That is entirely due to how HHH chooses to missimulate it, namely by not > calling itself, but a different version that doesn’t abort. > Why do you not pass the same DD as an input to HHH? > The same machine address of DD is the only reference to DD that any termination analyzer ever sees. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 07:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <d996576dcc981ba4323aaa37f9021d6aa5f44471@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113407 |
On 2/10/25 7:04 AM, olcott wrote: > On 2/10/2025 5:18 AM, joes wrote: >> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:03 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>>> >>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring >>>>>>>>> to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates >>>>>> only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the >>>>>> call from DD to HHH correctly. >>>>> >>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated >>>>> by HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination >>>>> value of the DD input to HHH. >>>> >>>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >>>> >>> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an entirely >>> different execution trace. > >> That is entirely due to how HHH chooses to missimulate it, namely by not >> calling itself, but a different version that doesn’t abort. >> Why do you not pass the same DD as an input to HHH? >> > > The same machine address of DD is the only reference to DD that > any termination analyzer ever sees. > > And thus your model is incomplete. The address alone isn't enough data to answer the question, for instance, how can you answer, as a PURE function, what the halting behavior is for the program at 0x2BAD is? Remember, a PURE FUNCITION can only look at "its input", and not any other memory. Thus, if we pass the address of an object, we treat the input as the objet pointed to by that pointer. And thus, your decider needs to consider as its input ALL of the code used by that address pointed to by that address, and as such, the code for the HHH that DD calls has been FIXED as part of the input. Thus, you can't change it to look at you concept of "all HHH", but need to use a copy in another address, like HHH1 is, and that example shows that some verision of HHH *CAN* simulate to the end of that specific input (which included the code of the original HHH)/ Sorry, you are just proving that you are ignorant of what you talk about, and are so stupid that you cant learn that material, or even understand that you need to learn it. Too Stupid to see you are Stupid,
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-10 12:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2c796f56d68043ca2c4342e8ce6d5ef9d7e0550f@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113407 |
Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:04:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 2/10/2025 5:18 AM, joes wrote: >> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:57:03 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>>> >>>>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. >>>>>>>>> Referring to some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >>>>>>>> That DD halts is a verified fact. >>>>>>> The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! >>>>>> It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting >>>>>> program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it >>>>>> investigates only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable >>>>>> to process the call from DD to HHH correctly. >>>>> DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated >>>>> by HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination >>>>> value of the DD input to HHH. >>>> DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally. >>> That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD). That DD has an >>> entirely different execution trace. >> That is entirely due to how HHH chooses to missimulate it, namely by >> not calling itself, but a different version that doesn’t abort. >> Why do you not pass the same DD as an input to HHH? > The same machine address of DD is the only reference to DD that any > termination analyzer ever sees. And the code at that address, and all code called from there, including the code of HHH itself. -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | joes <noreply@example.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 19:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <f703242d29b846f79e3523878bd4d7785bb6445e@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113355 |
Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:37:09 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott: >>> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott: >>> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring to >>> some other DD does not change this verfied fact. >> That DD halts is a verified fact. > The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!! DD is the input to HHH. -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3f446d250e96214168ab253a67e01d881a3db29c@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113347 |
On 2/9/25 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
>>>>>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>>>> "if" statement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly
>>>>>> determine the halting behaviour of DD
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
>>>>>>> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
>>>>>>> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
>>>>>>> non-halting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when
>>>>>> given to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite
>>>>>> string,when given to a world class simulator, shows halting
>>>>>> behaviour. Only HHH fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So
>>>>>> it proves the failure of HHH.
>>>>>> HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the
>>>>>> simulation would terminate normally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/
>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>> has fully operational HHH and DD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
>>>>>>> from finite strings to behaviors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to
>>>>>> show halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
>>>>>> His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined
>>>>>> by the finite string depends on the simulator.
>>>>>
>>>>> When DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive simulation it is a
>>>>> verified fact that DD cannot possibly halt.
>>>>
>>>> Which proves the failure of HHH. It does not reach the end of a
>>>> halting program. All other methods show that DD halts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your comment only proves that you lack sufficient
>>> understanding of the C programming language.
>>>
>>
>> This is a proof of lack of logical reasoning.
>>
>> Verified fact 1: DD halts
>
> Fallacy of equivocation error.
> (a) All men are mortal
> (b) No woman is a man
> ∴ No woman is mortal
>
> The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally.
> Referring to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>
>
Of course it does, since the DEFINITION of the behavior of the input is
the behavior of the program the input represents.
DD when run, terminates normally because the one and only HHH in this
problem will aborts its simulation because it INCORRECT decided the
input does not halt, and returns 0 to it.
"Finite Strings" don't HAVE behavior, they represent things that do, and
that behavior is based on the definition of the thing they represent.
You don't seem to understand what you are talking about, and thus it is
YOU that has made the equivocation error.
The "behavior of the input" is DEFINED to be the behavior of the program
the input describes, which thus must BE a program, and thus includes ALL
the code of that program.
Thus "HHH" is a FIXED program, and that program aborts its simulation
and returns, so any arguement that changes the definition of HHH in the
world to something else, is BY DEFINITION equivocation, the use of a
term to mean something diffferent then its intended meaning in the context.
Sorry, you are just condemning your own arguements.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 08:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <44e1cd844519e767bc32f5ccf951e61d72b4d979@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113329 |
On 2/9/25 1:04 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
>>>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>> "if" statement.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly determine
>>>> the halting behaviour of DD
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
>>>>> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
>>>>> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
>>>>> non-halting.
>>>>
>>>> The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when
>>>> given to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite
>>>> string,when given to a world class simulator, shows halting
>>>> behaviour. Only HHH fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So
>>>> it proves the failure of HHH.
>>>> HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the
>>>> simulation would terminate normally.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>
>>>>> int DD()
>>>>> {
>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> int main()
>>>>> {
>>>>> HHH(DD);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/
>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>> has fully operational HHH and DD
>>>>>
>>>>> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
>>>>> from finite strings to behaviors.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to show
>>>> halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
>>>> His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined by
>>>> the finite string depends on the simulator.
>>>
>>> When DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive simulation it is a
>>> verified fact that DD cannot possibly halt.
>>
>> Which proves the failure of HHH. It does not reach the end of a
>> halting program. All other methods show that DD halts.
>>
>
> Your comment only proves that you lack sufficient
> understanding of the C programming language.
>
No, it proves your lack of sufficient understanding of what programs are.
Given the file, HHH is a SPECIFIC program and no other.
The input DD, halts when it is called, and thus is a Halting Program, BY
DEFINITION.
A "Correct Simulator" WILL reach the end of a Halting Program, again BY
DEFINITION.
Since HHH doesn't do that, it fails to be a "Correct Simulator" and thus
all your claims are just lies.
The fact that you only retort is to claim someone else doesn't
understand something, but can't show ANY facts that they don't
understand, just shows that it is YOU who doesn't understand what you
are talking about.
Your arguements demonstrat that you beleive false statements to be true
because you think it is ok to redefine core terms while still talking
about a statement that uses those terms in the standard way. That is
just basic FRAUD, and shows you are just a pathetic LIAR.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 09:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <voai6n$m3dj$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #113344 |
On 2/9/2025 7:08 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 2/9/25 1:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
>>>>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>>> "if" statement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly determine
>>>>> the halting behaviour of DD
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
>>>>>> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
>>>>>> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
>>>>>> non-halting.
>>>>>
>>>>> The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when
>>>>> given to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite
>>>>> string,when given to a world class simulator, shows halting
>>>>> behaviour. Only HHH fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So
>>>>> it proves the failure of HHH.
>>>>> HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the
>>>>> simulation would terminate normally.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> HHH(DD);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/
>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>> has fully operational HHH and DD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
>>>>>> from finite strings to behaviors.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to
>>>>> show halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
>>>>> His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined
>>>>> by the finite string depends on the simulator.
>>>>
>>>> When DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive simulation it is a
>>>> verified fact that DD cannot possibly halt.
>>>
>>> Which proves the failure of HHH. It does not reach the end of a
>>> halting program. All other methods show that DD halts.
>>>
>>
>> Your comment only proves that you lack sufficient
>> understanding of the C programming language.
>>
>
> No, it proves your lack of sufficient understanding of what programs are.
>
It is an easily verified fact that the input to HHH(DD)
cannot possibly reach its own "if" statement when HHH
is a simulating termination analyzer. This conclusively
proves that the C function DD does not halt and can be
correctly rejected as non-halting.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-09 12:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <fd3fbd088190b7939944e32e3171ec80b09f5032@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113352 |
On 2/9/25 10:39 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/9/2025 7:08 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 2/9/25 1:04 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
>>>>>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>>>> "if" statement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly
>>>>>> determine the halting behaviour of DD
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
>>>>>>> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
>>>>>>> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
>>>>>>> non-halting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when
>>>>>> given to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite
>>>>>> string,when given to a world class simulator, shows halting
>>>>>> behaviour. Only HHH fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So
>>>>>> it proves the failure of HHH.
>>>>>> HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the
>>>>>> simulation would terminate normally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> HHH(DD);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.researchgate.net/
>>>>>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>>>>>> has fully operational HHH and DD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
>>>>>>> from finite strings to behaviors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to
>>>>>> show halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
>>>>>> His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined
>>>>>> by the finite string depends on the simulator.
>>>>>
>>>>> When DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive simulation it is a
>>>>> verified fact that DD cannot possibly halt.
>>>>
>>>> Which proves the failure of HHH. It does not reach the end of a
>>>> halting program. All other methods show that DD halts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your comment only proves that you lack sufficient
>>> understanding of the C programming language.
>>>
>>
>> No, it proves your lack of sufficient understanding of what programs are.
>>
>
> It is an easily verified fact that the input to HHH(DD)
> cannot possibly reach its own "if" statement when HHH
> is a simulating termination analyzer. This conclusively
> proves that the C function DD does not halt and can be
> correctly rejected as non-halting.
>
But HHH is not a correctly simulating program, so that condition isn't
satisfie.
Your logic is based on a known to be false premise, and thus is a FRAUD.
Your just don't seem to understand that the input to a program analyzer
needs to be a description of a full program, which includes ALL the code
of that program, and thus DD include HHH and thus the one coding of HHH
in your file is the only HHH that can exist for the discussion, and that
doesn't correctly simulate the input.
You can imagine giving the input to a DIFFERENT program, one that IS a
correct simulator (like HHH1), but that doesn't change the decider that
DD calls, as it, by definition, is that one HHH that was provided.
Your argument is just based on the FRAUD of changing the input, but
changing the definition of the one HHH that exists.
Sorry, you are just proving that you are nothing but an ignorant
pathological lying idiotic FRAUD that doesn't know what he is talking about.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-08 17:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <47f02a4b9e61fe386c169419609533b2f8091b86@i2pn2.org> |
| In reply to | #113309 |
On 2/8/25 9:43 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
>>> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>> "if" statement.
>>
>> Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly determine
>> the halting behaviour of DD
>>
>>>
>>> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
>>> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
>>> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
>>> non-halting.
>>
>> The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when
>> given to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite
>> string,when given to a world class simulator, shows halting behaviour.
>> Only HHH fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So it proves the
>> failure of HHH.
>> HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the
>> simulation would terminate normally.
>>
>>>
>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>
>>> int DD()
>>> {
>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>> if (Halt_Status)
>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>> return Halt_Status;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> HHH(DD);
>>> }
>>>
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/
>>> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
>>>
>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>>> has fully operational HHH and DD
>>>
>>> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
>>> from finite strings to behaviors.
>>
>> Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to show
>> halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
>> His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined by
>> the finite string depends on the simulator.
>
> When DD calls HHH(DD) in recursive simulation it is a
> verified fact that DD cannot possibly halt.
Of course it can, since you claim that HHH(DD) is correct to return 0,
then it must do so, as you can't be a correct decider and not do what is
claimed to be correct, and that means that DD calls HHH(DD) which WILL
return to DD.
The fact that HHH can't correctly simulate to that point is irrelevent,
as "Halting" is defined by the behavior of the actual machine, and not
some incorrect simulators simulation.
And any simulation that stops before reaching a final state is incorrect
for the purposes of detemining halting.
Sorry, you just don't know what your words mean.
>
>> He fail to see that a finite string defines a behaviour independent of
>> the thing that runs or simulates it. It seems that he is incapable to
>> learn that a failure of a simulator does not define a behaviour.
>>
>>
>
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.theory
csiph-web