Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:51:45 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <41298ee9840bbcb4fcb341b297d22dbbb62c42fc@i2pn2.org>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$1@dont-email.me> <vojrqp$2oikq$3@dont-email.me>
	<ffb46665a51356faf0fa3b56db966a31812e8134@i2pn2.org>
	<vokon8$2t882$1@dont-email.me> <vol0mf$2ulu5$1@dont-email.me>
	<vom1q4$34osr$3@dont-email.me> <von3q8$3d901$1@dont-email.me>
	<vone2v$3ffar$3@dont-email.me> <vonibr$3g195$1@dont-email.me>
	<voobvq$3kga9$1@dont-email.me> <vophu2$3ufag$1@dont-email.me>
	<voqpf6$5k6g$1@dont-email.me> <vosc1j$h568$2@dont-email.me>
	<vosnea$jd5m$2@dont-email.me> <voth2j$o3pk$1@dont-email.me>
	<votn62$pb7c$2@dont-email.me> <voutp5$12hqt$1@dont-email.me>
	<vovfov$15ohc$1@dont-email.me> <vovlfh$160g5$1@dont-email.me>
	<vovqjp$17scr$1@dont-email.me> <vp05ff$19vgo$1@dont-email.me>
	<vp05v8$19oed$1@dont-email.me>
	<b2da5d2b71ff0b6f4b7f3c1cec00d31c6681d37e@i2pn2.org>
	<vp1im8$1kden$1@dont-email.me> <vp1qh7$1m05h$1@dont-email.me>
	<46154e2ca31e87a86a047949f806f2b73c6745cc@i2pn2.org>
	<vp220j$1n991$2@dont-email.me>
	<f50e167a359344c6b6db0548fc390c947647d4ca@i2pn2.org>
	<vp2d8l$1p9f5$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:51:45 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="626721"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3090
Lines: 26

Am Tue, 18 Feb 2025 10:41:57 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 2/18/2025 7:53 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Tue, 18 Feb 2025 07:29:55 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 2/18/2025 6:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 2/18/25 6:22 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am talking about the impossibility of defining an Algorithm to
>>>>> correctly encode square circles not placing any limit on
>>>>> computation.
>>>>>
>>>> And who cares about that.
>>>>
>>> It is generally the case that problems that are defined to be
>>> impossible DO NOT EVER ACTUALLY LIMIT COMPUTATION.
>> Impossible problems, like halting deciders. Asking for one makes no
>> sense the same way that asking for square circles does. Sure, you may
>> be able to decide on the halting of infinitely many programs, but there
>> will always be inf. many you cannot, among them everything that calls
>> the supposed „decider”.
>> 
> What no one has ever bothered to notice is that impossible problems do
> not place any actual real limit on computation.
Well, only if you unfathomably *wanted* a decider. 

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.