Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 14:42:08 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 168
Message-ID: <v20eqg$bki0$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v1m4et$1iv85$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1m5co$lbo4$2@i2pn2.org> <v1m71h$1jnpi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1m7mh$lbo5$5@i2pn2.org> <v1mb8f$1kgpl$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1mkf8$lbo5$7@i2pn2.org> <v1mkmm$1q5ee$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1na6f$1ugl0$1@dont-email.me> <v1o67n$24f4c$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1q1ie$2l40t$1@dont-email.me> <v1q9fp$qb0p$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v1qmq8$2prs6$1@dont-email.me> <v1qouc$2qb2s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1vbpd$3gbc$1@dont-email.me> <v1vslr$7enr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1vuor$24b2$1@news.muc.de> <v20027$865j$1@dont-email.me>
 <v200oo$843p$1@dont-email.me> <v200u2$8dd9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v202k0$8q16$1@dont-email.me> <v20654$9o07$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2086v$a4tr$1@dont-email.me> <v208db$a6jn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v20ak6$an12$1@dont-email.me> <v20b6v$akk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v20eg6$bn7u$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 21:42:09 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e9b15de5cbd4b611ca4438a3f5fabf94";
	logging-data="381504"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19DrDmJcTXg/hFdKA/maj05"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7dbwsbtD4aZudV8phT9lFtHgTYI=
In-Reply-To: <v20eg6$bn7u$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 8571

On 5/14/2024 2:36 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 14.mei.2024 om 20:40 schreef olcott:
>> On 5/14/2024 1:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:52 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 5/14/2024 12:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:14 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 11:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:45 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 10:42 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:30 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 10:08 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 4:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-12 15:58:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/2024 10:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-12 11:34:17 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/24 5:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-11 16:26:30 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am working on providing an academic quality 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition of this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> term.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The definition in Wikipedia is good enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think he means, he is working on a definition that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> redefines the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> field to allow him to claim what he wants.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here one can claim whatever one wants anysay.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In if one wants to present ones claims on some 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> significant forum then
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is better to stick to usual definitions as much as 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sort of like his new definition of H as an 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "unconventional" machine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that some how both returns an answer but also keeps on 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are systems where that is possible but unsolvable 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsolvable even in those systems.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This notation does not work with machines that can, or have 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that can, return a value without (or before) termination.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In any case you diverged away form the whole point of this 
>>>>>>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard is wrong when he says that there exists an H/D pair 
>>>>>>>>>>>> such
>>>>>>>>>>>> that D simulated by H ever reaches past its own line 03.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, in the same way that you are wrong.  The above "C code" 
>>>>>>>>>>> is garbage;
>>>>>>>>>>> as already pointed out, it doesn't even compile.  So any talk of
>>>>>>>>>>> "reaching line 3" or "matching" that "code" is vacuous nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any H/D pair matching the above template where D(D) is simulated
>>>>>>>>>> by the same H(D,D) that it calls cannot possibly reach past 
>>>>>>>>>> its own
>>>>>>>>>> line 03. Simple software engineering verified fact.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since nobody knows who has verified this fact en there have 
>>>>>>>>> been counter examples, 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *See if you can show that your claim of counter-examples is not 
>>>>>>>> a lie*
>>>>>>>> *See if you can show that your claim of counter-examples is not 
>>>>>>>> a lie*
>>>>>>>> *See if you can show that your claim of counter-examples is not 
>>>>>>>> a lie*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *YOU SKIPPED THE CHALLENGE TO YOUR ASSERTION*
>>>>>> IS THAT BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS FALSE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *YOU SKIPPED THE CHALLENGE TO YOUR ASSERTION*
>>>>>> IS THAT BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS FALSE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *YOU SKIPPED THE CHALLENGE TO YOUR ASSERTION*
>>>>>> IS THAT BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT IS FALSE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Olcott is trying to stay at this point for several weeks now, but 
>>>>>>> he does not succeed. The reason probably is, that it is already a 
>>>>>>> few steps too far. First there must be agreement about the words 
>>>>>>> and terms used in what he says. So, we should delay this subject 
>>>>>>> and go back a few steps.
>>>>>>> Before we can talk about this, first there must be 100% agreement 
>>>>>>> about:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) What is a "verified fact"? Who needs to do the verification 
>>>>>>> before it can be said that it is a verified fact?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am ONLY referring to expressions that are PROVEN
>>>>>> to be {true entirely on the basis of their meaning}.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *CONCRETE EXAMPLES*
>>>>>> How do we know that 2 + 3 = 5?
>>>>>
>>>>> If needed we can write out the proof for this, starting from the 
>>>>> axioms for natural numbers. That proof is well known.
>>>>>
>>>>> But nobody here knows the proof for your assertion above, that it 
>>>>> is a verified fact that it cannot reach past line 03. So, we would 
>>>>> like to see that proof. Just the claim that it has been proven is 
>>>>> not enough.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The "nobody here" you are referring to must be clueless
>>>> about the semantics of the C programming language.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are you honest? Please, give the proof, instead of keeping away from it. 
>>
>> I have been an expert C/C++ programmer for decades.
>> If you knew C will enough yourself you would comprehend
>> that my claim about:
>>
>> Any H/D pair matching the above template where
>> D(D) is simulated by the same H(D,D) that it calls
>> cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>> This is a simple software engineering verified fact.
>>
>> My grandfather was a diagnostician and pathologist
>> said: "You can't argue with ignorance".
> 
> Again no trace of a proof. Only your authority and personal attacks 
> about lack of knowledge and ignorance. So, the text below still stands:
> 

*The only sufficient proof is being an expert in C yourself*
*Anyone that says that I am wrong without knowing C is dishonest*


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========