Re: ChatGPT correctly analyzed the first page of my paper:

On 10/1/24 7:30 PM, olcott wrote:

On 10/1/2024 2:15 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/1/2024 7:39 AM, olcott wrote:

>

Simulating Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D

>
[ .... ]
>

>
https://chatgpt.com/share/66fbec5c-7b10-8011-9ce6-3c26424cb21c
>

>

The above link to a ChatGPT conversation is entirely
complete with the first part being the entire input
provided to ChatGPT. The second part is the output that
ChatGPT deriving from analyzing this input.

>
You are aware that programs like ChatGPT are know for "hallucinating"
non-facts?  They have even less understanding of the truth than you do.
>
In fact, they tend to regurgitate whatever "facts" they are fed with.

 In other words you can convince it that its analysis
of my work is incorrect. I dare you to try to do that.

That's simple. D Halts (since the H it calls returns) so H(D) saying it doesn't is just wrong.
Your arguements that try to justify a wrong answer are all based on trying to change definitions, proving you are just a liar that doesn't know what he is talking about.
The fact you refuse to actually even TRY to refute that claim just shows you KNOW you are wrong.
Sorry, that *IS* the facts.

 

It seems likely you fed ChatGPT with the same non-facts that you have
been promulgating on this newsgroup.  Quoting the output of that program
as though it were some authority is even less well founded than a proof
by quoting a real authority.
>

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

>