Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally?

On 5/3/24 5:26 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/3/2024 2:30 PM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 03 May 2024 07:25:47 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>

On 5/2/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

Yes, there are a LOT of non-terminating programs that can be detected.
>
The problem is that when you make H and D actual programs, if H(D,D)
returns 0, then D(D) is NOT a "non-terminating" program.
>
Now, part of the issue is that this form of Termination Analysis isn't
as concerned about being able to be 100% for every possible program, but
wants to look at what classes of programs CAN be very reliably decided on.
>
So yes, it is RELATED to halting, but has a different criteria for what
is considered a solution. In part, because they KNOW that 100% accuracy
on EVERY program is impossible, so they want to study what CAN be done.
>
In the field, rejecting "hostile" programs that are trying to be
intentionally hard to decide isn't considered a failure.
>

>
YOU TRIED TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT AWAY FROM THIS.
I ONLY GLANCED AT A FEW OF YOUR WORDS TO TELL THAT YOU
TRIED TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT. ONCE I CAN TELL THAT YOU
ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT I QUIT READING.

>
This reminds me a lot of what you accused us of
(reading only the beginning and jumping to conclusions).

 I told Richard that I am only willing to discuss one single point
until we have mutual agreement on this point.

But you don't get to control the direction of the conversation.

 Most everyone uses his change-the-subject form of rebuttal
to make sure that we never get any closure on anything.

No, your failing to refute the errors pointed out means we can't get anywere.
When you repeat statements that have been refuted and not answered means YOU have ground the subject to a halt.

 *Because of my POD24 diagnosis I can no longer tolerate that*

No, you can't tolerate wasting time, which is what you are doing be leaving all the errors pointed out as undealt with, but still repeating your LIES (as they become when their error is pointed out and you don't deal with it)

 Validation of POD24 as a robust early clinical end point of poor survival in FL from 5225 patients on 13 clinical trials
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34614146/
 >

Yes, you have said you shoild die soon, you have been saying this for several years, and have continued longer than you originally projected by quite a bit.
If you want to go faster, you need to deal with the issues pointed out.