Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and
 infinite sets
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 19:47:30 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v38eqi$2foi0$9@i2pn2.org>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v362eu$2d367$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v363js$vg63$2@dont-email.me> <v36803$2d368$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v368je$100kd$3@dont-email.me> <v373mr$2d367$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v37bpa$15n0b$1@dont-email.me> <v37i9p$lls$1@news.muc.de>
 <v37kfn$17606$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5ednfcIqoaD_Mr7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v37qvj$18brs$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 23:47:30 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2613824"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v37qvj$18brs$1@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 4423
Lines: 89

On 5/29/24 2:08 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/29/2024 12:08 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>> On 29/05/2024 17:17, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/29/2024 10:40 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>>>
>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [ .... ]
>>>>
>>>>> Everyone that knows the truth knows that I am correct and you are 
>>>>> wrong.
>>>>> There is NO correct reasoning that can possibly show that I am wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Everybody here, bar one person, knows you are wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>> *Most everyone here believes that I am wrong at least somewhere*
>>>
>>> When we go over what I am saying point by point and thus do not
>>> allow the *strawman deception CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT fake rebuttal*
>>> no one here have provided complete and correct reasoning that I
>>> am wrong on any one point.
>>>
>>> The point of this post is {templates and infinite sets}
>>>
>>> *Formalizing the Linz Proof structure*
>>> ∃H  ∈ Turing_Machines
>>> ∀x  ∈ Turing_Machines_Descriptions
>>> ∀y  ∈ Finite_Strings
>>> such that H(x,y) = Halts(x,y)
>>>
>>> *Here is the same sort of template to H/D pairs*
>>> ∃H ∈ C_Functions
>>> ∀D ∈ x86_Machine_Code_of_C_Functions
>>> such that H(D,D) = Halts(D,D)
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Mike Terry would know that I am correct. Ben might not understand
>>>>> quantification. Ben did verify this encoding:
>>>>
>>>> How about a bit of respect?  Mike specifically asked you not to cite 
>>>> his
>>>> name as a back up for your points.  Why do you keep doing it?
>>>
>>> I did not read it that way.
>>> I read that he said that I often respond to specific reviewers by name.
>>>
>>
>> My points were :
>> -   you refer to comments by reviewers (both here and elsewhere), often
>>      out of context, as an APPEAL TO AUTHORITY - i.e. in an attempt to
>>      shut down an ongoing discussion which you are incapable of arguing
>>      yourself.
>>      [I'm not suggesting I am any kind of "authority" here!.]
>>
>> -   you often /misrepresent/ reviewers position, because you lack the
>>      ability to understand what reviewers actually mean when they make
>>      a point to you.
>>
>> -   you should argue your own case in your own words.
>>
>> Mike.
> 
> Whenever I do quote someone I have always provided the time/date
> stamp so that the complete context can be easily seen.

Doesn't make it right to quote out of context, especially in violation 
of the persons stated desires.

I guess you are showing that you are forfeiting your "Copyright" since 
peoples wishes don't matter.

> 
> I also now add the unique Message-ID since the Thai spammer
> has forced Goggle Groups to shut down.
> 
> Message-ID: <rLmcnQQ3-N_tvH_4nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
> On 3/1/2024 12:41 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>  >
>  > Obviously a simulator has access to the internal state
>  > (tape contents etc.) of the simulated machine. No problem there.

Which doesn't mean what you claim that he supports.

> 
> I waited for two years for someone to confirm this key element
> of my proof.
>