Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.logic, sci.math, comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability |
| Date | 2025-12-09 10:05 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <10h9hc4$1cult$1@solani.org> (permalink) |
| References | (25 earlier) <NBMZQ.42371$aeF6.1611@fx40.iad> <10h86b0$1c0rh$1@solani.org> <9sNZQ.1877$C_K8.965@fx42.iad> <10h88kv$1c2nb$1@solani.org> <XOUZQ.21385$URL8.15291@fx04.iad> |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On 12/9/2025 6:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 12/8/25 11:30 PM, polcott wrote:
>> On 12/8/2025 10:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 12/8/25 10:50 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/8/2025 9:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 12/8/25 10:16 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/8/2025 8:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/8/25 9:34 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/8/2025 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/8/25 8:00 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/8/2025 6:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What did I insufficeintly specify?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Troll
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In other words, you admit defeat.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not in the least little bit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then why didn't you answer the question?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The key difference with you as a troll compared to
>>>>>>>> other trolls is that you do have a reasonably deep
>>>>>>>> understanding of some of these things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, you admit that I know what I am talking about, and that you
>>>>>>> just refuse to answer the question.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only logical reason, is because you can't, because you lied
>>>>>>> about what you can do. After all, why would you hide the proof
>>>>>>> that you are smarter than me?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The answer, because you know you are out matched and are running
>>>>>>> aways scared and trying to throw up a smoke screen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The following may not be over your head if you cared
>>>>>>>> to understand instead of being locked in rebuttal mode:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping from
>>>>>>>> their [finite string] inputs to an accept or reject
>>>>>>>> state on the basis that this [finite string] input
>>>>>>>> specifies or fails to specify a *particular* semantic
>>>>>>>> or syntactic property.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right, but are only CORRECT if the answr they give matches the
>>>>>>> answer to the problem they are SUPPOSED to decide on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will give you a much simpler example.
>>>>>> If a universal truth predicate is defined
>>>>>> to return true when and expression is true
>>>>>> and false when an expression is false then
>>>>>> what does it correctly return for this:
>>>>>> True("What time is it")
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You have a problem with you definition,
>>>>>
>>>>> A Truth Predicate is defined to return True if the input statement
>>>>> is true, and false for anything else, either a false statement, or
>>>>> a statement without a truth value.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That makes perfect sense to me, what is a
>>>> halt decider defined this way?
>>>>
>>>> true if it is determined that it halts else false.
>>>
>>> No, not "DETERMINED", but *IF* it halts.
>>>
>>
>> True(X) if X is determined to be True,
>> false if false, gibberish or paradox.
>
> Only in your LIES.
>
> That has been one of your core problems, you never bothered to learn the
> ACTUAL meaning of the terms, but just guessed based on what you
I did make sure to never look at the conventional
received view of these things because it contains
all kinds of nonsense. For one thing there are about
nine different conventional received views.
Not even one person here ever looked at the correct
view that I reversed engineered. My work is a new
idea that is inconsistent with what they memorized
and they rejected it entirely on that basis making
no attempt to understand what I am saying.
Claude AI LLM acts like it has a PhD in everything
so it can connect together ideas from five different
fields.
So far no one here has achieved even as much as a baby
talk level of understanding of fully integrating
semantics directly in the syntax such the model theory
is not needed.
LLM systems immediately fully understand this and prove
that their understanding is correct by connecting all
of these ideas together on the basis of standard definitions.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott
My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.
This required establishing a new foundation
for correct reasoning.
Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:32 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 17:53 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 12:07 -0600
Re: A new category of thought dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 13:19 -0500
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 16:55 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:04 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 11:49 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 09:26 -0600
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 08:46 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:52 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:21 -0600
Re: A new category of thought André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-12-05 19:57 -0700
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 21:18 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 11:01 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:40 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:47 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:16 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:04 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 09:55 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:43 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-06 22:16 -0500
Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 21:50 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-07 05:32 +0000
Re: A new category of thought Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-12-07 15:49 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 11:38 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 07:32 -0500
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 07:37 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 17:55 -0500
Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 17:15 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 21:50 -0500
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:26 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 07:40 -0500
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:47 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 19:18 -0500
Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 19:00 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:24 -0500
Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 20:34 -0600
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:57 -0500
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:16 -0600
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 22:22 -0500
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:50 -0600
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 23:20 -0500
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 22:30 -0600
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 07:42 -0500
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 10:05 -0600
Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 23:02 -0500
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:14 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 07:07 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:41 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-08 19:39 +0000
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:57 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:30 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:53 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:33 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:42 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:03 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 06:12 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 07:59 -0600
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:18 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 20:23 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 14:51 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 16:27 -0500
Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:53 -0800
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:17 -0500
Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 16:35 -0800
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 20:10 -0500
Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:49 -0800
Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:50 -0800
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:59 +0000
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-01 23:11 -0500
Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 21:39 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:59 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 22:44 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 17:19 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:21 -0500
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:13 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 19:50 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-01 13:02 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:15 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 10:53 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 08:00 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-03 12:41 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 09:59 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:48 +0200
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-05 09:30 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 10:41 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:37 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:24 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:39 +0200
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 08:59 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-09 15:15 +0200
Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 12:04 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-14 13:02 +0200
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:39 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 20:01 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 17:37 +0000
Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 13:44 -0600
Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 15:08 -0500
csiph-web