Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Subject | Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| References | (2 earlier) <INydnVdkv8OZCH39nZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <JQ1EI.21803$tE1.9474@fx45.iad> <vN2dnQt1A5wzKH39nZ2dnUU7-LvNnZ2d@giganews.com> <k53EI.6949$Tf7.358@fx26.iad> <c-udnfvYE8oLV339nZ2dnUU7-e_NnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| From | Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> |
| Message-ID | <R35EI.6950$Tf7.3601@fx26.iad> (permalink) |
| Organization | Forte - www.forteinc.com |
| Date | 2021-07-03 17:58 -0400 |
On 7/3/21 4:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/3/2021 2:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 7/3/21 3:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2021 1:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 7/3/21 12:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/3/2021 11:25 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> void P(u32 x)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
>>>>>>> if (Input_Halts)
>>>>>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For H(P,P) to be correct one of these must apply:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> H(P,P) == 0 and P(P) does not halt, or
>>>>>> H(P,P) != 0 and P(P) halts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Neither is the case.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Superficially it may seem that way until you realize (as you have
>>>>> already realized) that the halt criteria must be adapted for a
>>>>> simulating halt decider.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WHY? The standard definition works perfectly fine? Does P(I) Halt or
>>>> Not
>>>> when it runs.
>>>>
>>>>> Because a simulating halt decider must always abort the simulation of
>>>>> every input that never halts its halt deciding criteria must be
>>>>> adapted.
>>>>
>>>> But it must CORRECTLY halt. As has been shown, H incorrectly aborts the
>>>> simulation of P because it doesn't take into account that this P WILL
>>>> Halt because H does incorrectly halt its simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does the input halt on its input?
>>>>> must become
>>>>> Does the input halt without having its simulation aborted?
>>>>>
>>>>> This change is required because every input to a simulating halt
>>>>> decider
>>>>> either halts on its own or halts because its simulation has been
>>>>> aborted.
>>>>
>>>> But if it halts because the contained halt decider does abort its own
>>>> simulation of a copy of P, then it IS a halting computation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This may be simply too difficult for you to understand.
>>>
>>> When a simulating halt decider only simulates its input until it detects
>>> that its input exhibits non-halting behavior then
>>>
>>> We can know that this simulating halt decider has no effect what-so-ever
>>> on the behavior of this input.
>>>
>>
>> Right, but it DOES have an affect on its caller, which you neglect to
>> take into account.
>>
>
> If a simulating halt decider H ALWAYS merely simulates its input until
> it detects that its input matches an infinite execution behavior pattern
> then H can always ignore its own behavior when it is analyzing the halt
> status of its input.
No it can't. Because the fact that H does abort it simulation does
affect the code that we simulated CALLING that H.
You are making a BIG assertion here with ZERO proof.
The clear counter example is that if we REALLY look at what would happen
to Linz H^. Given that your H is stipulated to return the non-Halting
answer, H^ (here called P) will clearly halt. UTM(P,P) will finish in
finite time. THEREFORE, H did not NEED to abort its simulation. Yes, it
is programmed to do so, but it is wrong in doing it.
If you change H to not abort, you now have a DIFFERENT machine P,
because Turing Machines contain ALL of the code that they exectute (if
you want to claim otherwise PROVE IT). Thus any anlaysis done with a P
using a non-aborting H is irrelevenent to the P that uses an aborting H.
>
> Even though you have been very very annoying this last couple of message
> exchanges were very very helpful in that they forced me to make my
> explanations much much more clear. As a result of this I am very
> thankful for your reviews.
>
>> Also, until its decision is actually PROVED correct, then the fact that
>> it aborted its simulation does not by itself actually prove that the
>> decision was correct and the input was actually non-halting.
>>
>
> Of course it doesn't
WHy not. P(P) Does Halt. You have traced it to do so. It is simple to
analytically prove this too with the simple fact of inspection of the
code with the stipulation that H(P,P) returns 0.
Give an ACTUAL proof that it is correct.
Note, your traces sren't one because you make the analysis based on the
incorrect assumption that you can ignore the actions of the decider in
analyizing the trace. Your 'rules' ignore that H WILL abort the simulation.
>
>>> This also means that while a simulating halt decider is examining the
>>> behavior of its input it can safely ignore its own behavior.
>>
>> It can ignore 'its own', but not other instances of itself.
>
> It can always ignore it own behavior and it can do this by screening out
> machine address ranges to be ignored. H ignores all of its own behavior
> and the behavior or every operating system function.
Yes, you can do it, but you get improper results. You have not shown ANY
Logical ground for you 'claim' that you can ignore the behavior of the
copy of H within P in anylizing P. ZERO.
Please show an ACTUAL proof that this if valid, starting from well
accepted properties of machines, with sound analyitical steps. Or even a
reputable source that makes this same claim under these conditions.
IT WON'T EXIST.
>
>> If is sees a
>> copy of itslef (even if the same exact source code executing at the same
>> addresses, but in a different execution context). then because that
>> decier CAN AND WILL affect the execution of the machine it is simulating
>> (the caller of that copy) it MUST include its behavior.
>>
>
> It is only the outer-most H that aborts the simulation of its input
> (only the outer H has seen the longest execution trace) and it only does
> this after its input has totally proven that it is never ever going to
> halt unless it is aborted.
But, if the outer-most H is modified (without changing the H that is
inside P) to be just a simulatior, then it is seen that P will halt.
Thus it was WRONG to decide that it was non-halting.
BAD LOGIC, BAD LOGIC.
>
>> Fundamentally, you are missing the important Software Engineering
>> concept of exectution context. The exact same code executing under
>> different contexts needs to be considered as different identities.
>>
>
> Not at all. It is a verifiable fact that every H only simulates its
> input until its input has proven beyond all possible doubt that it is
> never ever going to halt unless aborted by some H.
>
NOT PROVEN, decieded with unsound logic. FAIL.
SOME H, yes, an H that is part of the logic of P will incorrectly abort
the simulation of a copy of P and allow P to come to a halt.
Since this is PART of P, that lets that decision be part of the reason
that P is a halting computation.
Just like this one:
for(int i=0; isLessThan(i, 5); i++) continue;
>>>
>>> When this simulating halt decider does detect an infinite execution
>>> behavior pattern then it can correctly stop simulating its input and
>>> report that its input does not halt.
>>>
>>>
>> It has INCORRECTLY detected an infinite execution because it has failed
>> to take into account the actions of the copy of H within its simulation.
>>
>
> void P(u32 x)
> {
> u32 Input_Halts = H(x, x);
> if (Input_Halts)
> HERE: goto HERE;
> }
>
> There are no copies. There are nested invocations that all share the
> same machine code in the same way that recursive invocations share the
> same machine code. Nested simulations are really nothing more than a
> slightly more complex case of recursive invocation.
If no copies, then NOT the H^ of Linz and not even the equivalent of a
proper Turing Machine.
You have YET to prove that claim.
>
>> It is starting by ASSUMING that H doesn't abort its simulation. As soon
>> as it decides that maybe it should abort its own simulation, it needs to
>
> H only aborts its simulation after it has 100% perfect proof that it must.
Maybe YOU think it is 100% certain, but you are using unsound logic and
wrong.
This is PROVEN by the fact that even YOU have demonstarted the P(P) when
run as the top level machine Halts.
Halting != non-Halting
>
>> feed that change of condition back into its logic about what it has
>> seen. Since it is contemplating aborting its own simulation, it needs to
>> take into account that other copies might do the same. Failure to do so
>> leads to faulting reasoning and wrong answers.
>>
>
> As soon as the input to H meets the infinite recursion criteria H stops
> its simulation.
>
>
>
WRONG. As soom as H incorrectly matches the incorrect criteria it
incorrectly halts P and gives the wrong answer.
You can't be much more wrong there.
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 10:19 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-03 08:25 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 10:32 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 11:56 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 11:19 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-03 18:28 +0200
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 11:51 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-03 19:18 +0200
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 12:19 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2021-07-03 19:33 +0200
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-03 19:10 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 13:49 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 14:29 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-03 17:25 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 11:49 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 14:17 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 14:08 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 15:43 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 15:37 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 17:58 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 17:20 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 18:55 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-03 23:57 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 18:13 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 19:04 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 18:34 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 20:06 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 19:26 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 21:21 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 20:41 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 22:13 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 21:22 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-03 23:24 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 22:32 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-04 06:40 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 09:24 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ prerequisites to understanding me] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-04 14:50 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-03 19:14 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 20:38 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-03 22:14 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-03 22:18 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 23:18 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-04 00:50 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 09:15 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-04 10:31 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:07 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-04 11:24 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-04 13:00 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 15:09 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-04 13:30 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:23 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-07-05 07:18 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:31 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 11:10 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 10:18 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 11:29 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 12:53 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 12:13 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-04 14:55 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) "dklei...@gmail.com" <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2021-07-04 18:03 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 20:42 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-04 22:31 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 08:05 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:40 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 12:13 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-04 23:20 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2021-07-05 18:49 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2021-07-05 15:17 -0600
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 17:38 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 23:52 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 10:36 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:51 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 11:36 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:18 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 12:11 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Why can H ignore its own behavior? ](my thanks to Richard) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-04 15:02 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-03 21:20 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 16:21 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-04 01:23 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 19:30 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-04 17:46 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 12:00 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-05 02:04 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 20:57 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-05 03:14 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 21:28 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-04 22:33 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-04 22:09 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 07:33 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:38 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 10:57 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:59 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 11:34 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 13:16 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 12:48 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 14:36 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 12:18 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-05 23:58 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 19:54 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 21:29 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 03:35 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 22:30 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-06 06:47 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-06 04:15 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-06 13:23 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 07:21 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ halting criteria ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 08:26 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ halting criteria ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 10:50 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ halting criteria ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:56 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 10:30 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:33 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 11:02 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] (correction) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 09:35 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] (correction) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 12:38 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] (correction) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 12:10 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ already agreed ] (correction) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-05 13:43 -0400
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ Richard's excellent summation ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-05 19:12 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-03 11:01 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 13:15 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-03 21:09 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 16:06 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-04 01:44 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 19:59 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-04 02:34 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 20:46 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? [ incorrect question ] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-04 17:45 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-03 19:15 +0100
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-03 13:58 -0500
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-03 22:37 -0700
Re: Could H correctly decide that P never halts? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-04 14:14 +0100
csiph-web