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 ... industry standard stipulative
 definitions
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 19:57:37 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <vepne2$2f3g0$5@dont-email.me>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me>
 <99541b6e95dc30204bf49057f8f4c4496fbcc3db@i2pn2.org>
 <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me> <vedibm$4891$2@dont-email.me>
 <72315c1456c399b2121b3fffe90b933be73e39b6@i2pn2.org>
 <vee6s1$7l0f$1@dont-email.me>
 <1180775691cf24be4a082676bc531877147202e3@i2pn2.org>
 <veec23$8jnq$1@dont-email.me>
 <c81fcbf97a35bd428495b0e70f3b54e545e8ae59@i2pn2.org>
 <vef37r$bknp$2@dont-email.me>
 <7e79306e9771378b032e6832548eeef7429888c4@i2pn2.org>
 <veikaf$14fb3$1@dont-email.me> <veipmb$15764$2@dont-email.me>
 <c56fcfcf793d65bebd7d17db4fccafd1b8dea072@i2pn2.org>
 <vejfg0$1879f$3@dont-email.me>
 <bde5947ebdcfb62ecd6e8968052cb3a25c4b1fec@i2pn2.org>
 <vekfi5$1d7rn$1@dont-email.me>
 <6d73c2d966d1d04dcef8f7f9e0c849e17bd73352@i2pn2.org>
 <velnqn$1n3gb$3@dont-email.me>
 <b06c4952248d83881642c7d84207d3d39c56c59f@i2pn2.org>
 <vend90$22rqh$1@dont-email.me>
 <674657dfa495f0e99eed360a8bba9a719bb8f319@i2pn2.org>
 <vepl64$2f3g0$1@dont-email.me>
 <f8691b3ebc009284c9018631f91c9b53ee906353@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 02:57:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3be8f25ba68f32da41cba57b2c08635d";
	logging-data="2592256"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185y2D/l+HSV46AXyMU9eLP"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:anJ726xeB2nm28Nqp2ETZK9fazY=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <f8691b3ebc009284c9018631f91c9b53ee906353@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4808

On 10/16/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/16/24 8:19 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/16/2024 6:44 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/15/24 11:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/15/2024 9:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/15/24 8:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/15/2024 4:58 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 20:12:37 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 12:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 5:53 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-13 12:49:01 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/12/24 8:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Trying to change to a different analytical framework than the 
>>>>>>>>>> one that
>>>>>>>>>> I am stipulating is the strawman deception. *Essentially an
>>>>>>>>>> intentional fallacy of equivocation error*
>>>>>>>>> But, you claim to be working on that Halting Problem,
>>>>>>>> I quit claiming this many messages ago and you didn't bother to 
>>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>> Can you please give the date and time? Did you also explicitly 
>>>>>>> disclaim
>>>>>>> it or just silently leave it out?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even people of low intelligence that are not trying to
>>>>>> be as disagreeable as possible would be able to notice
>>>>>> that a specified C function is not a Turing machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> But it needs to be computationally equivalent to one to ask about 
>>>>> Termination.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not at all.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function
>>>> A termination analyzer need not be a Turing computable function.
>>>
>>> Strange, since any function that meets the requireemnt
>>>
>>> the function return values are identical for identical arguments (no 
>>> variation with local static variables, non-local variables, mutable 
>>> reference arguments or input streams, i.e., referential transparency),
>>>
>>> Is the equivalent of a Turing Machine.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> *According to the industry standard definitions that I stipulated*
>>>
>>> You can't stipulate that something is a standard.
>>>
>>
>> A c function terminates when it reaches its "return"
>> instruction. I stipulate this basic fact because you
>> disagree with basic facts. When it is stipulated then
>> your disagreement is necessarily incorrect.
>>
> 
> We don't disagree with that, 

Good.

Then when HHH correctly emulates N steps of DDD you might
also agree that this means that N steps of DDD were correctly
emulated by HHH.

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