Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Subject | Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.math, comp.theory, sci.logic |
| References | (7 earlier) <10g87a7$upad$1@dont-email.me> <-k3t_AWjQHLMjeopJvJ2h2VN98Y@jntp> <10g8a9c$vrtg$1@dont-email.me> <4p9d_Jnf16LRCUCi3z7O-Aq2C68@jntp> <10g8dgv$10ub6$1@dont-email.me> |
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
| Message-ID | <mFXVQ.34690$d6ed.11541@fx12.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Forte - www.forteinc.com |
| Date | 2025-11-27 07:40 -0500 |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
On 11/26/25 9:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/26/2025 8:00 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 27/11/2025 à 02:42, olcott a écrit :
>>> On 11/26/2025 7:24 PM, Python wrote:
>>>> Le 27/11/2025 à 01:51, olcott a écrit :
>>>>> On 11/26/2025 6:39 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>> On 2025-11-27, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 5:55 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 4:19 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 3:47 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 2:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 12:35 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words you are trying to get away with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or the semantics of the C programing language.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Says the pitiful twit who has no meaningful response to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results shown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with code.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not the one that came up with the jackass idea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of restarting a simulation after it has already
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusively proved that it cannot possibly halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That the continuation of the simulation reaches a final
>>>>>>>>>>>>> halting state
>>>>>>>>>>>>> conclusively proves otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And Olcott has no idea how to fix it and is no longer
>>>>>>>>>>>> able to engage with tasks involving code.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>> return;
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And the continuation of the simulation
>>>>>>>>>>> at the "return" statement "proves"
>>>>>>>>>>> by deception that infinite loops halt.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea what you are blabbing about, and neither do you.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We could simulate Infinite_Loop() until it
>>>>>>>>> proves that it cannot possibly stop running
>>>>>>>>> unless aborted, then abort it. Now to use
>>>>>>>>> your method we can "resume" the simulation
>>>>>>>>> at a different machine state.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, you fucking idiot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This simulation is "resumed" at the "return"
>>>>>>>>> instruction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, you fucking idiot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "In other words you are trying to get away with
>>>>>>>> disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language
>>>>>>>> or the semantics of the C programing language."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See above.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I discussed you (not by name) with Claude AI.
>>>>>>> It is convinced that you must be a liar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right; anything but atually get to grips with some code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will fix this by actually adapting a C interpreter
>>>>>>> to prove that you are a liar to anyone that knows C.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I tried to do this with x86 yet this proved far
>>>>>>> too difficult for even the chief editor of one
>>>>>>> of the most prestigious computer science journals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is child's play to show that your claims based on
>>>>>> that x86 contraption are incorrect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When you resume any simulation that cannot possibly
>>>>>>> stop running to the exact same total machine state
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, only the state of the simulation is resumed, not
>>>>>> the total machine state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Great you finally admit that you are cheating.
>>>>> Anyone knowing comp.theory will understand this
>>>>> is cheating.
>>>>
>>>> Quite the opposite.
>>>>
>>>> Don't pretend to talk in the name of other people. SINNER !
>>>
>>> Kaz is saying that he can "resume" a simulation
>>> that has just proved that it will never stop
>>> running to a different machine state to "prove"
>>> that this simulation does stop running.
>>
>> He is right.
>>
>
> He is resuming a simulation that he already admitted
> that he conclusively proved is non-halting to contradict
> himself and prove that it is halting by "resuming" this
> simulation at a different machine state.
>
But if the simulation was conclusively proved to be non-halting, why did
it halt?
Answer: Because it was NOT proved to be non-halting, a DIFFERENT input,
one that called a DIFFERENT decider was shown to be non-halting.
The problem is you logic is built on the concept that changing constants
in the middle of a problem is valid.
In other words, that it is ok to LIE.
>>> I am estimating that you are agreeing with
>>> Kaz not even knowing that what he is claiming.
>>
>> You are "estimating" wrong. This is called hubris and lies. Both are
>> SINS.
>
> I have never said a single thing in this forum since
> 2020 that I did not wholeheartedly believe is true.
But, since a reasonable person (which you are not) would understand it
them not be true, make you just a pathological liar.
Lies include statements that are obviously false, even if the person
unreasonably beleives them, that just shows they are mentally incapable
of understanding the truth.
>
> To the best of my knowledge I have not even exaggerated
> at all or made any substantive error since 2020 in
> the substance of any of my claims since 2020.
>
> To the best of my knowledge the biggest mistake
> that I have made since 2020 is my syllogism example
> that I made today and Kaz caught.
>
And the problem that "to the best of your knowledge" is MEANINGLESS as
you are just proving yourself to be delusional.
Knowledge and truth are different, but you think you miniscule idea of
what you know defines truth, showing your utter stupidity,
Back to sci.math | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 09:00 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 07:31 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 07:31 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-26 12:01 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 09:17 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-26 10:29 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-26 18:35 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 13:55 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 14:58 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-26 21:47 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 15:53 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-26 22:19 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 16:48 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 18:00 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-26 23:55 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 18:20 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 00:39 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 18:51 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 20:02 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-11-27 01:24 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 19:42 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-11-27 02:00 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 20:37 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 04:15 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 22:31 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 06:51 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 08:59 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-27 10:16 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 18:17 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-27 07:41 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-27 07:40 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 23:00 -0800
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-11-27 01:39 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 19:47 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-11-27 01:59 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 20:26 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 04:19 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 22:39 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-27 09:49 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-26 23:58 -0800
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-28 10:14 +0200
The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 08:46 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-28 10:59 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-29 11:27 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:38 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 14:58 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-01 12:45 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 06:47 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 14:29 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 08:38 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 14:45 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 08:57 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 15:06 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 09:19 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 09:26 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 09:29 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 15:31 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 09:39 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 15:48 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 09:55 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-01 16:00 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 10:27 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 16:41 -0800
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 18:24 -0600
Olcott is provably correct --- no one can correctly refute this olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 19:54 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 11:07 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 08:14 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-03 13:34 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 10:27 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-04 11:17 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 08:15 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 11:23 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:47 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- updated Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-06 17:26 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 09:21 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-27 10:40 -0500
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 18:37 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-27 18:24 +0000
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-11-28 10:18 +0200
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-28 08:52 -0600
Re: The halting problem is incorrect two different ways --- faking ignorance Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-28 11:01 -0500
csiph-web