Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning
 instead of rhetoric -- RP
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 18:30:27 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <0b4d800f349f0b3a32cb28bf5458cad6bd05082c@i2pn2.org>
References: <vvm948$34h6g$2@dont-email.me> <vvtf7n$17c1i$5@dont-email.me>
	<87plgdmldp.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vvudut$1ife1$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvuii0$1j0qo$1@dont-email.me> <vvuk0d$1j6s0$5@dont-email.me>
	<vvvbtd$1ov7e$10@dont-email.me> <vvvpia$1tcfq$1@dont-email.me>
	<vvvqd1$1tgam$1@dont-email.me> <vvvrhl$1so2t$2@dont-email.me>
	<vvvtki$1tgam$3@dont-email.me> <vvvud5$1so2t$3@dont-email.me>
	<1000ce4$21dtc$3@dont-email.me> <1000q52$24gr3$2@dont-email.me>
	<1000qss$24jh0$2@dont-email.me> <1000rfv$24gr3$6@dont-email.me>
	<1000s0e$24sr2$1@dont-email.me> <1000s6d$24gr3$8@dont-email.me>
	<1000t1a$24sr2$4@dont-email.me> <1000t8e$24gr3$11@dont-email.me>
	<1000vs5$29e7u$1@dont-email.me> <100101g$24gr3$14@dont-email.me>
	<10011b6$29e7u$4@dont-email.me> <10012le$24gr3$17@dont-email.me>
	<1001370$2a1j4$1@dont-email.me> <100172f$2ao7o$1@dont-email.me>
	<10017lb$2aojt$1@dont-email.me> <100184e$2asas$1@dont-email.me>
	<10018ij$2aut2$1@dont-email.me> <100197l$2asas$2@dont-email.me>
	<1002ev3$2i4bk$20@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 18:30:27 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="289662"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2661
Lines: 17

Am Wed, 14 May 2025 11:04:51 -0500 schrieb olcott:

> The HP proofs require an input D that can actually do the opposite of
> whatever value that H returns. Such an input cannot possibly exist.
H returns "D doesn't halt" and D halts. Seems possible.

> A halt decider is certainly not required to report on the computation
> that itself is contained within.
Yes it is, if it contains that computation in turn.

> Thus HHH cannot report on the halt status of its caller because it
> cannot see its caller.
Due to the "pathological relationship" its caller is the same as what
it is simulating, so it is indeed simulating itself.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.