Re: Bad faith and dishonesty

On 5/29/2025 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/29/2025 2:08 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 29/05/2025 20:02, olcott wrote:

On 5/29/2025 1:40 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 29/05/2025 19:14, olcott wrote:

>
<snip>
>

It is a tautology that any input D to termination
analyzer H that *would never stop running unless aborted*
DOES SPECIFY NON-TERMINATING BEHAVIOR.

>
But in making that claim you assume that you correctly know the termination behaviour of D.
>

>
All that H needs to know is that D
*would never stop running unless aborted*

>
But it *doesn't* know that.
>
You forgot to address my substantive point.
>

 Not at all. I have been doing this for a very long time.
Even when we go exactly one point at a time it takes people
here several years to begin to address that one point.
 It is a tautology that any input D

i.e. a description of algorithm D

to simulating termination
analyzer H that *would never stop running unless aborted*

i.e. if algorithm D does not halt, or equivalently if UTM(D) does not halt.

DOES SPECIFY NON-TERMINATING BEHAVIOR.
 If you now agree that the above *is* a tautology then
we can move on to the next point.
 

I can easily sketch out a program that your HHH analyser would impatiently abort as non-terminating, but which could conceivably stop running this year, next year, sometime... or never.

>