Re: Bad faith and dishonesty

On Thu, 29 May 2025 19:40:57 +0100, Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
wrote in <101a9np$gl7$1@dont-email.me>:

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

On 5/29/2025 12:40 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 29/05/2025 16:49, olcott wrote:

On 5/28/2025 4:16 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 28/05/2025 22:05, dbush wrote:

On 5/28/2025 2:38 PM, olcott wrote:

My only aim is to show that the conventional halting problem proof
is wrong.

>
But why would you care whether or not the proof is wrong when
you've gone on record (multiple times) as stating that what the
proof proves is correct?

>
It would certainly earn him a place in history's footnotes, which
might well be considered sufficient motive. But he'd have to be able
to explain why he's right, which of course he can't.
>
<snip>
>
>

See my post: [Disagreeing with tautologies is always incorrect]

>
And it seems you still can't.
>
I have already read your article "Disagreeing with tautologies is
always incorrect"[1], which completely fails to explain your proof.

 
Maybe you have no idea what a tautology is.

 
Maybe you think that asserting something is true is sufficient to make
it true. It isn't.
 
 

Its the same thing as a self-evident truth.

 
Maybe you think that asserting something is self-evidently true is
sufficient to make it self-evidently true. It isn't.
 

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
     If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
     until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
     stop running unless aborted then
 
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.
 
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.

Was wondering when someone would mention that...what does his HHH()
do with arbitrary programs?

$ cat ddd.c
#include <stdio.h>

void ddd(int r)
    {
    r--;
    if(r <= 0) return;
    fprintf(stderr,"calling ddd(%d)\n",r);
    ddd(r);
    fprintf(stderr,"returning, r=%d\n",r);
    return;
    }


int main(void)
{

ddd(50);

return 0;
}

I'd bet his HHH() would say this is non-terminating.

--
-v