Sujet : Re: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.org (joes)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 15. Jul 2024, 15:59:12
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <9c04727b16adcbc4a480b6fa3ad84696e0f332a5@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:26:22 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/15/2024 3:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-14 14:38:31 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/14/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-13 20:15:56 +0000, olcott said:
int main()
{
HHH(Infinite_Loop); HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
HHH(DDD);
}
Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination of HHH
necessarily specifies non-halting behavior or it would never need to
be aborted.
Everyone understands that DDD specifies a halting behaviour if
HHH(DDD) does,
*You can comprehend this is a truism or fail to* *comprehend it
disagreement is necessarily incorrect* Any input that must be aborted
to prevent the non termination of HHH necessarily specifies
non-halting behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
That the input is aborted does not mean that the input must be aborted.
Weasel words. This is an axiom:
Input XXX must be aborted to prevent the non-termination of HHH.
Only if it does not terminate by itself.
And if the input specifies that its input is aborted then the behaviour
is not non-terminating.
-- Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:Objectively I am a genius.
…