Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #125111
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? |
| Date | 2025-08-13 19:20 +0100 |
| Organization | Fix this later |
| Message-ID | <107il1m$1u7e$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <107h9j9$3ms6e$2@dont-email.me> <107hcao$3o9os$1@dont-email.me> <107i886$3uaqn$3@dont-email.me> <107icgf$3voj5$1@dont-email.me> <107igcm$p1u$1@dont-email.me> |
On 13/08/2025 18:01, olcott wrote:
> On 8/13/2025 10:54 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 13/08/2025 15:42, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/13/2025 1:45 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 13/08/2025 06:59, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/13/2025 12:43 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/08/2025 06:30, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You ask: How is this answer not self-evident ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly simulates
>>>>>>> its input
<snip>
>>
>> To you, clearly, this is a very simple matter, and no doubt
>> anyone who disagrees with you is an incompetent buffoon who
>> knows nothing about programming.
>
> No it is much more specific that that.
What happens after HHH returns?
> When on claims that an emulation is incorrect
> yet zero instructions were emulated incorrectly
> then the claim is proved to be incorrect.
Here is an emulator that emulates zero instructions incorrectly:
int BugfreeEmulator(ptr P)
{
(void)P; /* suppress irritating warning about
doing bugger all with P. */
return 0;
}
Emulating zero instructions incorrectly is not sufficient for you
to have a correct emulator. You must finish the job you started.
But you don't.
> Point out the instruction that was emulated
> incorrectly or acknowledge that you cannot.
Why should I?
(a) It's your bug to find.
(b) Even if you find it, it won't matter, for reasons I outlined
(again!) in my last reply.
You don't read too well.
>> Nevertheless, you asked the question "how is this answer not
>> self- evident?" and I am endeavouring to answer it for you.
>>
>
> Yes, you seem to be doing well at that.
> I am surprised to find that seeing this execution trace
> is too difficult for everyone here:
Why should anyone even bother to look? No matter what your trace
says, you still have only three choices - return halt (wrong!),
return loop (wrong!) or don't return (wrong!). Whichever you
choose, it's the wrong solution, even if your trace is flawless.
> When HHH(DD) is executed that this begins simulating
> DD that calls HHH(DD) that begins simulating DD that
> calls HHH(DD) again.
You keep saying that, but you never stop to think what happens
when HHH /stops/ executing.
>> How, then, is it not self-evident that it is correct for
>> HHH(DD) to return 0? Because to do so would mean that HHH is
>> reporting that DD does not halt, but, on receiving that return
>> value from HHH, DD will immediately halt.
>>
>
> That only requires seeing the above execution trace.
Your trace fails to show the stack unwinding after HHH has
reached its decision, all simulation is concluded, and DD regains
control at last.
> You did point out the C by itself needs some additional
> infrastructure. I had presumed that people would simply
> assume that HHH uses some C language interpreter.
It doesn't matter. What matters is not what happens inside HHH
(which is apparently so trivial you don't even bother to show the
source) but what happens after HHH returns.
>
>> Conversely, if HHH instead returns 1 to reflect this, DD will
>> instead enter into its loop, again giving the lie to HHH's
>> return code.
>>
>
> That is not the behavior of the input.
How do you know? You don't simulate that far.
>> It seems to me, then, that HHH cannot return either value
>> correctly, and must (to avoid incorrectness) instead refuse to
>> return, in which case it cannot complete its task, which is to
>> report on whether DD halts.
>>
>
> It does seem that way when you expect an embedded
> halt decider to report on its own behavior.
I'm not asking HHH to tell me anything but whether DD halts.
> The nature of Turing machines does not allow them to
> directly report on their own behavior because this
> requires Turing machines to take other Turing machines
> as inputs.
You don't have a Turing machine. You have an x86 program.
>>> The x86 language
>>> is the ultimate measure of correct simulation.
>>
>> Again, this is not self-evident. It's not true on ARM, it's
>> not true on RISC-V, it's not true in IBM-Z... none of which use
>> x86 but on all of which simulation is not only possible but no
>> doubt performed. The claim is self-evidently false.
>>
>
> Disagreeing with the fact that the DD code
> was written in the x86 language does not help.
Here is the DD code:
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
That's C syntax, not x86 syntax.
> Disagreeing with facts never helps.
Talking bollocks doesn't help either.
>
>> Neither is the x86 language the ultimate measure of correct
>> simulation on the x86, if by that you mean that any simulator
>> written in x86 assembly language is bound to be correct. If
>> that were true, developers would only have to re-specify their
>> problem as a simulator to guarantee that it would be free of
>> bugs. Nonsense, clearly.
>>
>> No, the x86 language is the ultimate measure of one thing and
>> one thing only - ie what happens when you execute x86
>> instructions on an x86 platforms.
>
> Unless you can find an instruction of DD that was
> emulated incorrectly your claim that DD was emulated
> incorrectly remains insufficiently grounded.
I've already dealt with that several times. Here is my most
recent effort, re-posted in the way you like so much:
Finding your bug is your job, and nobody else's. That there is a
bug is self-evident. Here's why:
(a) HHH(DD) returns 0 to report looping, but DD then halts.
(b) HHH(DD) returns 1 to report halting, but DD then loops.
(c) HHH(DD) refuses to return.
In (a) and (b) HHH gives the wrong answer, and in (c) HHH fails
to answer the question it is asked.
There are no other possibilities, so HHH necessarily screws up.
Ergo, there is a bug. Finding it is nobody's job but yours.
Since you're such a clever and all-knowing programmer it probably
won't take you more than five minutes to find and fix it.
But when you do, you'll be right back where you are now.
Because the one thing your HHH cannot tell you, no matter how
perfectly it simulates what it can reach, is what DD will do when
it reclaims control.
> _DDD()
> [00002192] 55 push ebp
> [00002193] 8bec mov ebp,esp
> [00002195] 6892210000 push 00002192 // push DDD
> [0000219a] e833f4ffff call 000015d2 // call HHH
> [0000219f] 83c404 add esp,+04
> [000021a2] 5d pop ebp
> [000021a3] c3 ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>
> We can determine from the above code that DDD correctly
> emulated by HHH would include HHH emulating an instance
> of itself emulating an instance of DD. **
Irrelevant. What matters is what happens when HHH eventually
unwinds the stack and returns.
> ** As long as HHH has access to an x86 emulator that
> provides the cooperative multi-taking infrastructure
> required to implement this.
It doesn't matter. What happens when HHH returns?
>>>> To you, clearly, your work is flawless. I realise that that's
>>>> never going to change no matter what anyone says, but there
>>>> are those of us who disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you would merely understand the x86 code and understand
>>> that the x86 language is the ultimate measure of correct
>>> simulation then you would agree with me.
>>
>> Just as you are assured that you are self-evidently correct, so
>> I am sure that you self-evidently are mistaken. The x86
>> language has NOTHING to say on the correctness of your code;
>
> It has everything to say about the correctness of DD
> emulated by HHH.
Then you can save yourself a lot of clocks with this hack
int HHH(ptr P)
{
return 0;
}
If the question before us is whether HHH observes DD to halt, you
can save yourself 1300-odd lines of code.
>
> Three different LLM systems did not need to even see
> the x86 code.
Neither did I. return 0; works nicely.
> They figured out the recursive simulation
> execution trace all on their own on the basis of the C code.
So what? How HHH works doesn't matter a jot. What matters is
*whether* it works, and I have already explained *that* it
doesn't and *why* it doesn't.
> I was surprised that C itself does not permit
> outputting the actual machine address of a function
> even though it does use this address itself internally.
How C implementations manage function pointers is an
implementation detail. There's more than one way to skin a cat,
and C does not unnecessarily limit the implementors by telling
them which blade to use.
>>> Three different LLM systems could see the recursive
>>> emulation on their own without prompting on the basis
>>> of the semantics of the C code.
>>
>> Great! You have convinced three AIs that you are correct.
>
> I am shocked that everyone here thinks that recursive
> emulation is incomprehensibly more difficult to understand
> than ordinary recursion.
It isn't hard to understand. It's just irrelevant to the question
of whether HHH returns the correct value (which it doesn't, by
the way).
>> I hope that makes you very happy. But AIs are notoriously
>> gullible and are quick to hallucinate things that are not true,
>> so their support doesn't offer you as much backing as you might
>> hope. As you have discovered over the last 20-odd years, humans
>> are less easily convinced.
>>
>
> Unless someone actually bothers to see if they
> can find an actual error in what they said.
Finding your bug is your job, and nobody else's. That there is a
bug is self-evident. Here's why:
(a) HHH(DD) returns 0 to report looping, but DD then halts.
(b) HHH(DD) returns 1 to report halting, but DD then loops.
(c) HHH(DD) refuses to return.
In (a) and (b) HHH gives the wrong answer, and in (c) HHH fails
to answer the question it is asked.
There are no other possibilities, so HHH necessarily screws up.
Ergo, there is a bug. Finding it is nobody's job but yours.
Since you're such a clever and all-knowing programmer it probably
won't take you more than five minutes to find and fix it.
But when you do, you'll be right back where you are now.
Because the one thing your HHH cannot tell you, no matter how
perfectly it simulates what it can reach, is what DD will do when
it reclaims control.
>>> That three different systems see that actual execution
>>> trace and no one can point to any specific error in this
>>> execution trace seems to prove that I am correct.
>>
>> That is not self-evident. It lacks rigour.
>>
>
> It is not self-evident when you don't bother to
> look at what they say.
We know what they say, because you wouldn't have told us about
them if they'd said anything else.
> It is self-evident when you see that they all
> provide this same execution trace:
What is self-evident is that they don't explain what happens in
DD after HHH returns.
> When HHH(DD) is executed that this begins simulating
> DD that calls HHH(DD) that begins simulating DD that
> calls HHH(DD) again.
...and when it stops?
> The simulation shows DD calling HHH(DD) repeatedly
> This creates an infinite recursive loop in the simulation
So HHH never reports? Bug.
> No simulated execution path leads to DD's return statement
> being reached
So the simulator fails to emulate DD in its entirety.
> https://claude.ai/share/da9e56ba-f4e9-45ee-9f2c-dc5ffe10f00c
>
> In other words, simulating DD() requires simulating
> HHH(DD), which requires simulating DD() again… recursive
> simulation.
>
> This creates an infinite regress — HHH cannot finish
> simulating DD() because to simulate it, it must simulate
> itself again, and again, and again…
So it can't report. Bug.
> https://chatgpt.com/share/68939ee5-e2f8-8011-837d-438fe8e98b9c
>
> When HHH simulates DD, it must model DD's execution,
> including the call to HHH(DD) within DD.
> This introduces a recursive simulation: HHH simulating
> DD involves simulating DD's call to HHH(DD), which
> requires HHH to simulate DD again, and so on.
> https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMg%3D%3D_810120bb-5ab5-4bf8-af21-eedd0f09e141
This fails to explain what happens in DD after HHH reports.
>
>>> Dogmatically saying that I am wrong without being able
>>> to show exactly which instruction was simulated incorrectly
>>> does not seem to count as any actual rebuttal.
>>
>> Finding your bug is your job, and nobody else's. That there is
>> a bug is self-evident. Here's why:
>>
>> (a) HHH(DD) returns 0 to report looping, but DD then halts.
>> (b) HHH(DD) returns 1 to report halting, but DD then loops.
>> (c) HHH(DD) refuses to return.
>>
>> In (a) and (b) HHH gives the wrong answer, and in (c) HHH fails
>> to answer the question it is asked.
>>
>> There are no other possibilities, so HHH necessarily screws up.
>> Ergo, there is a bug. Finding it is nobody's job but yours.
>>
>
> HHH1(DD) and DD() benefit from the fact that HHH(DD)
> has aborted its simulation of DD.
>
> HHH(DD) cannot benefit from the fact that HHH(DD)
> has aborted its simulation of DD because HHH has
> not done this yet.
We'll wait.
If HHH never reports, that's a bug.
>
>> Since you're such a clever and all-knowing programmer it
>> probably won't take you more than five minutes to find and fix it.
>>
>> But when you do, you'll be right back where you are now.
>>
>> Because the one thing your HHH cannot tell you, no matter how
>> perfectly it simulates what it can reach, is what DD will do
>> when it reclaims control.
>>
>>> Do you have many years as a C/C++ programmer?
>>
>> I could answer that and we could have a pissing match, but even
>> if I had no programming experience whatsoever, you would still
>> be self-evidently wrong, your code would still self-evidently
>> fail to stay within the bounds of what the C language
>> guarantees, and your logic would still be up the creek.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>
> Most "rebuttals" make sure to ignore my corrections
> to their provably false assumptions.
Your provable false assumption is that HHH "correctly" simulates
its input.
Here's the proof:
Finding your bug is your job, and nobody else's. That there is a
bug is self-evident. Here's why:
(a) HHH(DD) returns 0 to report looping, but DD then halts.
(b) HHH(DD) returns 1 to report halting, but DD then loops.
(c) HHH(DD) refuses to return.
In (a) and (b) HHH gives the wrong answer, and in (c) HHH fails
to answer the question it is asked.
There are no other possibilities, so HHH necessarily screws up.
Ergo, there is a bug. Finding it is nobody's job but yours.
Since you're such a clever and all-knowing programmer it probably
won't take you more than five minutes to find and fix it.
But when you do, you'll be right back where you are now.
Because the one thing your HHH cannot tell you, no matter how
perfectly it simulates what it can reach, is what DD will do when
it reclaims control.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 00:30 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 06:43 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 00:59 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 07:45 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 09:42 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 16:54 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 19:20 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:07 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:12 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:24 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:26 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:37 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:42 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 19:14 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:27 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 19:32 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:39 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 19:47 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:58 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:08 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:16 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:22 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Rice's Theorem is now Rice Krispies olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:30 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Rice's Theorem is now Rice Krispies Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:35 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-13 20:13 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:33 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:28 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:39 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:44 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 09:34 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 21:25 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:49 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:51 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:06 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 17:08 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:09 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 17:13 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 22:19 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 06:43 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 07:01 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:03 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:38 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:42 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:43 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:58 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 20:19 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:26 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 20:39 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:48 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 20:59 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 20:10 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:24 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 20:44 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:47 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:08 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:05 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:57 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:12 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 23:30 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 05:13 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 07:03 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:46 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 05:07 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 07:06 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:35 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:37 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:59 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:15 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 23:33 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 23:30 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 05:52 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 00:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 06:26 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 00:31 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 06:36 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 00:42 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 07:09 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 08:00 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 09:33 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:07 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 12:00 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:53 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 12:58 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 19:23 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 18:42 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:58 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 17:01 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 18:09 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 17:28 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 18:36 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 19:14 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 18:33 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 19:40 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:41 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 18:54 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 19:04 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:10 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 19:37 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 21:16 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 20:28 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 21:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-14 20:43 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 21:50 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 10:29 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:40 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 19:41 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:43 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 19:45 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Tarski undefinability theorem dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 20:53 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-15 08:18 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 14:54 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-15 08:13 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 16:07 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:58 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 18:23 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 15:53 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-14 16:28 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 22:48 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 07:10 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 08:00 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 09:27 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 15:55 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 10:07 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:41 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 18:19 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:57 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:06 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 12:02 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 07:09 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:38 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 17:22 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:48 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 23:08 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:14 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 07:21 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:28 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 23:43 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 18:47 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 23:55 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:03 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-14 00:05 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:08 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-14 00:36 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 19:47 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:39 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:50 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 23:02 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:54 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:37 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:48 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:53 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 22:13 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 21:15 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 17:20 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 03:28 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:58 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 22:13 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 23:32 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-14 07:14 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 04:33 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 09:28 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-13 20:33 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 10:09 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 10:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:13 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 11:47 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-14 17:50 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 12:53 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 19:20 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-08-14 19:32 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 14:45 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 21:01 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 16:26 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-14 23:38 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 17:43 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 18:52 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-14 22:52 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:52 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-13 22:57 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-13 07:04 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-13 05:56 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 01:05 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 07:47 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 09:55 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 16:58 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-13 07:07 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-13 11:31 +0300
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 09:59 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-14 12:45 +0300
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-13 07:01 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-13 12:33 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:33 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 21:36 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 09:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-14 11:15 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 16:59 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:04 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 17:09 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:12 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 17:13 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:26 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 17:32 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 13:03 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 18:09 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 13:14 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 18:19 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 13:27 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 18:29 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:10 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 19:19 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:30 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 19:37 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:48 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-14 11:21 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 20:49 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:02 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 21:55 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:03 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-14 11:45 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 20:40 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 14:55 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:01 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:06 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:12 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:20 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 20:30 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 15:44 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:46 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:08 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 17:10 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-13 20:19 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 16:35 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 17:33 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 19:33 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 19:23 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:23 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 17:26 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 12:29 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-13 17:34 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-13 19:37 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-14 11:31 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-13 17:39 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-13 13:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-14 11:39 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 17:26 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 12:35 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 01:54 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:58 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 18:38 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:48 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-14 18:51 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 14:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 03:06 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 19:00 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 14:15 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 03:23 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 14:46 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 03:53 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 15:00 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 04:15 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 15:54 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 05:09 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 16:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 05:42 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 17:02 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 06:19 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 10:59 +0800
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 13:45 -0700
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-14 21:11 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 16:29 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-15 13:27 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 07:07 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-16 10:34 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 06:54 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-16 08:30 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 09:05 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 09:09 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 10:57 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 10:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 12:51 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-16 12:11 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-16 14:25 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-16 17:24 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-16 14:25 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-14 20:02 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-14 19:13 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-15 13:20 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 07:01 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Kaz dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-15 08:15 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-14 06:40 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 10:18 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2025-08-14 09:06 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-14 09:17 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation minforth <minforth@gmx.net> - 2025-08-14 18:54 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 09:35 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 09:16 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 16:26 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-23 15:41 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 17:10 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 10:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-08-23 17:46 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 12:52 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 13:54 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-23 14:28 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 11:21 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-24 09:35 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 10:25 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-23 15:33 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 11:23 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-23 16:41 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 11:56 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-23 17:01 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 12:04 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-23 17:07 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 12:12 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-23 18:44 +0100
Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 13:05 -0500
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-23 20:58 +0100
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-28 10:31 +0300
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-28 09:37 -0500
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-29 09:56 +0300
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-29 09:07 -0500
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-29 22:15 -0400
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-30 06:06 +0000
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-30 10:08 -0500
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-30 13:16 -0400
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-30 13:34 +0300
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-30 11:22 -0500
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-08-31 11:45 +0300
Re: Measuring the actual behavior of the actual input to HHH(DD) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-29 22:12 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-23 21:36 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 16:45 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-23 19:00 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-08-24 05:53 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 07:19 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-24 12:34 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 07:52 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-24 14:25 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-24 16:44 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 11:19 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-24 16:24 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-24 17:55 +0100
My most significant progress --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 23:48 -0500
Re: My most significant progress --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 06:54 +0100
Re: My most significant progress --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 07:10 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 14:49 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 14:58 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-24 20:26 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 15:30 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-24 23:49 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 20:43 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-25 13:18 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 09:22 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 15:28 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 16:06 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-08-25 17:23 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 11:33 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 12:39 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 12:14 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 13:22 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 17:41 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 12:12 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 18:41 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 18:58 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 14:49 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-25 19:57 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 20:12 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 15:37 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-26 06:14 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 09:37 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-26 15:48 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-08-27 01:17 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 20:39 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-26 21:57 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 16:41 -0700
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 18:52 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 17:29 -0700
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 20:24 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 18:32 -0700
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 21:06 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-27 22:21 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-08-27 20:31 -0600
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 21:37 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-08-28 10:51 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-27 06:01 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-27 09:28 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 11:29 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 19:03 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 14:59 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 19:31 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-26 06:21 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 09:46 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 19:28 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 19:18 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 05:48 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-08-25 13:04 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 14:41 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 23:36 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 06:50 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 07:11 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-24 21:03 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 17:32 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-24 19:01 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 01:25 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 05:44 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 00:49 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 07:35 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 10:21 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 16:31 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 10:33 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-08-25 16:43 +0100
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-25 07:12 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-25 15:40 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-25 10:54 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-08-26 06:02 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 08:56 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 13:17 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 12:25 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 13:39 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-08-23 14:17 -0400
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 18:46 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-08-23 16:48 +0000
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? --- Recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 11:57 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-08-17 17:33 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 17:20 +0200
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-09-01 10:44 -0500
Re: How is this answer not self-evident ? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-09-01 11:58 -0400
csiph-web