Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v5eg5j$1ikpr$3@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts? Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:19:46 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 54 Message-ID: <v5eg5j$1ikpr$3@dont-email.me> References: <v56n8h$3pr25$1@dont-email.me> <v58ql8$9g3i$1@dont-email.me> <v597ju$brmn$2@dont-email.me> <v5b7f8$qu74$1@dont-email.me> <v5btit$v0vb$5@dont-email.me> <v5bub0$vagk$1@dont-email.me> <v5e3ou$1ge18$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:19:47 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="422dd2162c45ab1a09b084523bb5ca66"; logging-data="1659707"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+zBZZwCSRPxDmVg0L1W7sv" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:eNDrmSguUuyHXb2BRAfgM4tAmXs= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <v5e3ou$1ge18$2@dont-email.me> Bytes: 2747 On 6/25/2024 4:48 AM, Mikko wrote: > On 2024-06-24 14:03:12 +0000, immibis said: > >> On 24/06/24 15:50, olcott wrote: >>> On 6/24/2024 2:32 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-06-23 13:23:10 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 6/23/2024 4:42 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> When the head line has the words "these verified facts" the >>>>>> message should >>>>>> first tell what facts are "these verified facts" and who verified >>>>>> them >>>>>> before any further discussion. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It is a verified fact that 2 + 3 = 5 according to the semantics >>>>> of arithmetic. Anyone having an opinion that contradicts this is >>>>> WRONG. >>>> >>>> Sure, but that was not the first thing mentioned in the initial >>>> message. >>>> >>> >>> >>> int P(ptr2 x) >>> { >>> int Halt_Status = H(x, x); >>> if (Halt_Status) >>> HERE: goto HERE; >>> return Halt_Status; >>> } >>> >>> The call from P to H(P,P) when P is correctly emulated >>> by H cannot possibly return. >>> >>> The call from P to H(P,P) when P is correctly emulated >>> by H1 DOES return. >>> >>> >> >> Verified fact: the emulation is incorrect > > But which emulation? By H or by H1? > Both of them are correct. Because P never calls H1(P,P) and P does call H(P,P) the call from P to H(P,P) returns in the first case and cannot possibly return in the second case. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer