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
Subject: Re: The actual truth is that ...
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 05:17:25 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <vedibm$4891$2@dont-email.me>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me>
 <39f1a350cac0a8431753486526da1c35f458df65@i2pn2.org>
 <ve6lsa$207d$2@news.muc.de> <ve8289$336c8$1@dont-email.me>
 <ve91hf$1ab4$1@news.muc.de>
 <7959253e834d2861b27ab7b3881619c2017e199f.camel@gmail.com>
 <ve9ju2$3ar6j$1@dont-email.me>
 <a965e0f825570212334deda4a92cd7489c33c687@i2pn2.org>
 <vea0mi$3cg0k$2@dont-email.me>
 <a4d0f7ff8798ce118247147d7d0385028ae44168@i2pn2.org>
 <veb557$3lbkf$2@dont-email.me>
 <2e6d8fc76e4e70decca1df44f49b338e61cc557e@i2pn2.org>
 <vebchp$3m87o$1@dont-email.me>
 <1071eb58637e27c9b2b99052ddb14701a147d23a@i2pn2.org>
 <vebeu2$3mp5v$1@dont-email.me>
 <58fef4e221da8d8bc3c274b9ee4d6b7b5dd82990@i2pn2.org>
 <vebmta$3nqde$1@dont-email.me>
 <99541b6e95dc30204bf49057f8f4c4496fbcc3db@i2pn2.org>
 <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 12:17:26 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2f696c00f58e5fa7aed5825233c6f706";
	logging-data="139553"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+/8woZbxFFGi4DkJXv9ziH"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KlYqizzsuRE2k4q0BDvLb4n7w2w=
In-Reply-To: <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5398

On 10/12/2024 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-10-11 21:13:18 +0000, joes said:
> 
>> Am Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:22:50 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 10/11/2024 12:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/24 11:06 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/11/2024 9:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/11/24 10:26 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/11/2024 8:05 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/11/24 8:19 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/11/2024 6:04 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/24 6:19 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2024 2:26 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2024-10-10 at 17:05 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-09 19:34:34 +0000, Alan Mackenzie said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/8/24 8:49 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As soon you find out that they repeat the same over and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over, neither correcting their substantial errors nor
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> improving their arguments you have read enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott deliberately lies (he knows what is told, he choose to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distort). olcott
>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH is the measure then:
>>>>>>>>>>>> But since it isn't, your whole argument falls apart.
>>>>>>>>>>> Ah a breakthrough.
>>>>>>>>>> And an admission that you are just working on a lie.
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps you are unaware of how valid deductive inference works.
>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning
>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
>>>>>>>>> You can disagree that the premise to my reasoning is true.
>>>>>>>>> By changing my premise as the basis of your rebuttal you commit
>>>>>>>>> the strawman error.
>>>>>>>> So, how do you get from the DEFINITION of Halting being a behavior
>>>>>>>> of the actual machine, to something that can be talked about by a
>>>>>>>> PARTIAL emulation with a different final behavior.
>>>>>>> My whole point in this thread is that it is incorrect for you to say
>>>>>>> that my reasoning is invalid on the basis that you do not agree with
>>>>>>> one of my premises.
>>>>>> The issue isn't that your premise is "incorrect", but it is INVALID,
>>>>>> as it is based on the redefinition of fundamental words.
>>>>> Premises cannot be invalid.
>>>> Of course they can be invalid,

It is a type mismatch error.
Premises cannot be invalid.

>>> *It is a verified fact that you are clueless about this*
>>> It is important to stress that the premises of an argument do not
>>> have actually to be true in order for the argument to be valid.
>>> https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/

>> That doesn't make the conclusion true.
> 
> But it does tell that if the conclusion is false then at least one
> of the premises is false, too.
> 

It might not be that a premise is false either, it may only
seem false from a certain "received view" point of view.

Software engineering looks at things differently than the
theory of computation.

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}

When HHH is an x86 emulation based termination analyzer
then each DDD emulated by any HHH that it calls never returns.

Each of the directly executed HHH emulator/analyzers that returns
0 correctly reports the above non-terminating behavior of its input.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer