Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser
 agreed to are exactly met
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 20:15:10 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <4128a3a6251d480a8817c07f505024ad5b6a8183@i2pn2.org>
References: <1007icj$3qb7l$1@dont-email.me> <1007nuk$3rb4n$2@dont-email.me>
 <1007ocb$3rglr$1@dont-email.me>
 <76143f91fa788d09e4e8378fbbdd1b24732d1729@i2pn2.org>
 <100801g$3t067$1@dont-email.me>
 <28704f8a3b812cdb59a2afad2ce67d566d550084@i2pn2.org>
 <1008dc2$3vlcm$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 00:38:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="672722"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <1008dc2$3vlcm$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 5/16/25 6:14 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/16/2025 4:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/16/25 2:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/16/2025 12:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/16/25 12:16 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/16/2025 11:08 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>> On 16/05/2025 15:33, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> Mike does not agree that HHH(DD) gets the correct
>>>>>>> answer. He does agree that an HHH derived from the
>>>>>>> exact meaning of these words is correct:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
>>>>>>>      input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
>>>>>>>      would never stop running unless aborted then
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>>>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>>>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please stop telling other people what you think I agree and do not 
>>>>>> agree with.  It serves no possible purpose other than as some kind 
>>>>>> of warped Appeal To Authority.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just argue whatever point you are making in your own words.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mike.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The ultimate measure of truth is the correct reasoning
>>>>> that you provided showing exactly how a correct SHD
>>>>> can be derived from the exact meaning of the quoted words.
>>>>>
>>>>> You carefully evaluated the exact meaning of the quoted
>>>>> words and showed how a correct SHD can be derived from
>>>>> these words. Everyone else changes the words and then
>>>>> dishonestly rebuts the changed words.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone else is dishonest with me, yet will not
>>>>> be dishonest with you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> NO, it can't, and that is because you show you don't know the 
>>>> correct meaning for the words, because you beliave your lies about it.
>>>
>>> For 2.5 years the words always said that they
>>> require a partial simulation of non-terminating
>>> inputs and you "interpreted" that as meaning
>>> that non-terminating inputs must be infinitely
>>> simulated.
>>>
>>> Then you based your whole rebuttal on these changed words.
>>>
>>
>> No, the word have NEVER meant that the determination of "non-halting" 
>> is DEFINED by a partial simulation, 
> 
> Yes you damned liar this is what these words mean:
> *would never stop running unless aborted*
> 
> 

Show me where my definitions are wrong.

The only simulation that determines non-halting is an unbounded one.

Sorry, rules are rules and lies are just wrong.