Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Position Paper: Why Simulating Halt Deciders (SHDs) Require a Reframing of the Halting Problem
Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 11:15:55 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <100ujjr$19e50$1@dont-email.me>
References: <binYP.412288$6Qab.7156@fx07.ams4> <100t06c$r01g$2@dont-email.me> <4_nYP.350132$_Npd.325507@fx01.ams4> <100t2ka$ro5e$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 10:15:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="aa1dcc3c73b18a626e48b434fd480c46";
	logging-data="1357984"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19kOLDmIs95z1dOAS4/KXU7"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2E0kmlzDZEY4YOoITGW612vwSLw=

On 2025-05-24 18:19:54 +0000, olcott said:

> Proving that the rules have always been incoherent nonsense
> does seem to refute them.

To say anything about refuting any rules is a category error.
The word "refute" means to show that a claim is false. Rules
are not claims and therefore not false.

That you call something "incoherent nonsense" is more likely
a consequense of your defective understanding.

-- 
Mikko