Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) |
| Date | 2021-07-20 21:26 -0600 |
| Organization | Christians and Atheists United Against Creeping Agnosticism |
| Message-ID | <sd8465$dni$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (18 earlier) <jJCdnadn9f2gx2r9nZ2dnUU7-QfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sd7q30$rii$1@dont-email.me> <ArSdnUvjC_EnHWr9nZ2dnUU7-XvNnZ2d@giganews.com> <sd80he$tne$1@dont-email.me> <X9OdnUDHZ4KAEmr9nZ2dnUU7-SPNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
On 2021-07-20 21:06, olcott wrote:
> On 7/20/2021 9:24 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>> On 2021-07-20 20:04, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/20/2021 7:34 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>> On 2021-07-20 17:20, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/20/2021 5:27 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>> On 2021-07-20 16:14, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/20/2021 2:49 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2021-07-20 13:04, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/20/2021 1:53 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [ Malicious cross posting removed ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <NoOne@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/20/2021 12:35 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> [ Malicious cross posting removed ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <NoOne@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ .... ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I show all the steps of exactly how H(P,P)==0 is derived.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't. You haven't yet published the source code of an
>>>>>>>>>>>> alleged H.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> That you simply ignore these steps and claim that I am
>>>>>>>>>>>>> incorrect is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply dishonest.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it's being dishonest to indulge you with the suggestion
>>>>>>>>>>>> that what
>>>>>>>>>>>> you are doing has any possible validity. It is unimportant and
>>>>>>>>>>>> uninteresting why H(P,P)==0, if it actually is. It has no
>>>>>>>>>>>> bearing on
>>>>>>>>>>>> the halting theorem proofs, which work regardless of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> nature of any
>>>>>>>>>>>> purported halting decider. Seeing as how you can't disprove
>>>>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>>>> proofs honestly, you resort to falsehoods and obfuscation.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Even so,
>>>>>>>>>>>> the other posters on this newsgroup have seen through it and
>>>>>>>>>>>> exposed
>>>>>>>>>>>> it. When is all this nonsense going to end?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [ .... ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All of the proofs conclusively prove that H cannot possibly
>>>>>>>>>>> return a
>>>>>>>>>>> Boolean value corresponding to the actual halt status of P to
>>>>>>>>>>> P in the
>>>>>>>>>>> above computation.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wow!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> None of the proofs bother to examine whether or not returning
>>>>>>>>>>> a correct
>>>>>>>>>>> halt status from H to P in the above computation is required,
>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>> simply assume that it is required. *That is their error*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For crying out loud! It is an error to require what is
>>>>>>>>>> required by the
>>>>>>>>>> statement of the problem? The central element of the halting
>>>>>>>>>> problem is
>>>>>>>>>> a *UNIVERSAL* halting decider. And you're saying insisting
>>>>>>>>>> upon this
>>>>>>>>>> *universality* is an error?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I universal halt decider is one thing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A universal halt decider that must return a correct halt status
>>>>>>>>> to an input that does the opposite of whatever it decides is a
>>>>>>>>> much narrower specification.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 'Universal' means it decides all Turing Machines. The latter
>>>>>>>> would case would be included in 'universal'. so if it cannot
>>>>>>>> return the correct decision in that case it is not universal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is not strictly necessary for a halt decider to return any
>>>>>>> value to its input. This is merely a false assumption. H in
>>>>>>> main() aborts the simulation of P before the simulation of H in P
>>>>>>> ever returns any value to P. All of P including the simulation of
>>>>>>> H in P is strictly controlled by the H in main():
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But it is your contention that your 'decider' *only* aborts an
>>>>>> input if that input would not otherwise halt.
>>>>>
>>>>> It took me several days to verify (many months before I began
>>>>> posting about it) yet it is confirmed that if the outermost H does
>>>>> not abort its input then no other H ever will.
>>>>
>>>> But what does the outermost H do *after* it aborts its input? When
>>>> P(P) is run independently, neither the outermost P nor the H which
>>>> it contains are being simulated so they cannot be aborted. So what
>>>> value does the H inside the outermost P return to P?
>>>>
>>>
>>> void P(u32 x)
>>> {
>>> if (H(x, x))
>>> HERE: goto HERE;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> P((u32)P);
>>> }
>>>
>>> P(P) does specify infinitely nested simulation that must be aborted
>>> or it will never stop running. Invoking P(P) in main() merely
>>> postpones the inevitable.
>>
>> P(P) specifies a computation which at some point starts a series of
>> simulations, but the outermost P isn't part of that series of
>> simulations.
>>
>>>>>> If you are forced to abort some instance of H you are therefore
>>>>>> claiming that that instance does not halt on its input, which
>>>>>> means that you are acknowledging that your H cannot decide all
>>>>>> possible inputs. Therefore H is not a universal decider.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Moreover, when P(P) is run independently, neither the uppermost P
>>>>>> nor the H inside the uppermost P are under the controller of a
>>>>>> simulator
>>>>>
>>>>> The H that is executed rather than simulating by another H is
>>>>> always in control of its whole simulation chain.
>>>>
>>>> When P(P) is executed independently, the outermost P isn't part of
>>>> any simulation chain and is outside the scope of any H.
>>>>
>>>
>>> When the outermost P stops running this does not count as halting
>>> every element of the P(P) invocation chain specifies infinitely
>>> nested simulation.
>>
>> Of course it counts as halting. The outermost P isn't being simulated,
>> so it can't be aborted.
>>
>> I've agreed that when you abort a simulation that doesn't entail that
>> the *simulation* halted, because the simulation never reaches one of
>> its final states.
>>
>> But the outermost P *isn't* (and can't be) aborted. It halts by
>> reaching one of its final states. That is what it means to halt *by
>> definition*. That definitely counts as halting.
>>
>>>>>> since they are not being simulated. Therefore, the H inside the
>>>>>> uppermost P *must* return a value to the uppermost P since there
>>>>>> is no way for that H to be aborted. So which value does it return?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> André
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> None-the-less by logical necessity whenever H aborts its input it
>>>>> is always correct because its input would never ever stop running
>>>>> unless aborted.
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't answer my question. Which value does the H contained in
>>>> the outermost P (the one that isn't emulated) return to P?
>>>
>>> The question is whether or not H decides its input correctly.
>>> We know that H does decide its input correctly by logical necessity.
>>
>> So why not actually answer the question? If H decides its input
>> correctly, what answer does the H contained in the outermost P return
>> to the outermost P?
>>
>
> We know that the input to H does not halt on its input by logical
> necessity: We can verify that the input to H never every halts unless H
> aborts its simulation of its input:(P, P).
There's no 'logical necessity' involved here. The definition of
'halting' is clear and unambiguous. A computation halts when it reaches
one of its final states.
If the H contained in the outermost P of P(P) returns 'false', then the
outermost P *will* reach one of its final states, which means that P(P)
*does* halt. This clearly and unambiguously demonstrates that whatever
'logic' your H is using to decide that P(P) doesn't halt is simply wrong.
There is absolutely no way around this fact. You can't simply declare
that some instances of halting 'don't count' to justify your answer.
Halting is well-defined. There is absolutely no doubt as to the fact
that P(P) halts. To claim otherwise is simply delusional.
> This proves that H does decide its input (P,P) correctly. The halting
> problem proofs that claim to prove this is impossible are wrong.
>
>> Does it return 'halts', thereby forcing the outermost P into an
>> infinite loop, thereby contradicting the answer given by H, or does it
>> return 'doesn't halt', thereby causing the outermost P to *HALT*, also
>> contradicting the answer given by H?
And once again you refused to *directly* answer a simply question,
presumably because you know that a direct answer would demonstrate how
wrong your reasoning is.
André
>> It has to be one or the other.
>>
>>> Any other question unrelated to this question is the dishonest dodge
>>> kind of fake rebuttal.
>>
>> You're the one who appears to be dodging the question. What does the H
>> that *isn't* being simulated return to the P that *isn't* being
>> simulated?
>>
>> Neither of those can be aborted, and if H is truly a decider, it
>> *must* return an answer to the outermost P.
>>
>> André
>>
>
>
--
To email remove 'invalid' & replace 'gm' with well known Google mail
service.
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 13:50 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 13:22 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 14:37 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 13:59 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:06 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 09:17 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 14:20 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:24 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 14:34 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:38 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 14:45 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:53 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 15:12 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) [ Rice's Theorem ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 11:53 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-07-17 20:38 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 08:04 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 16:12 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 08:25 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 16:28 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 08:37 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 11:58 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 14:17 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 11:23 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 17:45 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 12:08 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 11:17 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 20:05 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 15:19 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-17 20:51 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 16:48 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-18 10:57 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-18 07:36 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-19 08:58 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-19 08:23 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-19 18:20 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 08:25 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-20 17:35 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 13:26 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2021-07-20 18:53 +0000
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 14:04 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 12:27 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 13:49 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 17:14 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 16:27 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 18:20 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 18:34 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 21:04 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 20:24 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 22:06 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 20:21 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 21:26 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 22:53 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 22:02 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-20 23:24 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 22:12 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-20 23:32 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ DOES NOT HOLD ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 09:11 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ DOES NOT HOLD ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 10:03 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ DOES NOT HOLD ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 11:11 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ DOES NOT HOLD ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 10:42 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ DOES NOT HOLD ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 10:16 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 21:23 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 11:45 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 10:22 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 12:23 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 10:41 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 12:26 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 13:54 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 13:26 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 14:44 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 12:56 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 15:09 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 16:29 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 15:02 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-07-21 21:08 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ global halt decider ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 12:55 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 11:29 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 12:51 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 12:19 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 13:49 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 13:22 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 14:43 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 13:12 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ][ADD] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 16:07 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ][ADD] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 14:32 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ][ADD] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 16:50 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ][ADD] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 15:07 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 15:06 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 16:22 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 14:38 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 15:57 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 17:21 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 15:53 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2021-07-21 16:59 -0600
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 20:21 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 18:53 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 13:07 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-21 15:29 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) [ Paradox rather than contradiction ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-21 14:08 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 19:33 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 18:07 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 12:14 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? ( H(P,P)==0 is correct ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 12:06 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-07-20 10:39 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2021-07-17 15:55 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 09:18 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:20 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2021-07-17 11:13 -0500
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 06:57 -0700
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2021-07-17 15:17 +0100
Re: Halting Problem Solved? (Black Box Decider Theory) V2 wij <wyniijj@gmail.com> - 2021-07-17 07:36 -0700
csiph-web