Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 6/15/2025 4:59 AM, Mikko wrote:Nothing about 50 years after your death can be verified before your death.On 2025-06-14 13:43:13 +0000, olcott said:The facts can be easily verified right now if people
On 6/14/2025 6:25 AM, Mikko wrote:You have said much that have no factual content. Facts that cannot beOn 2025-06-13 15:36:34 +0000, olcott said:Everything that I said is a verified fact.
On 6/13/2025 6:53 AM, Mikko wrote:It is unlikely that anyone would read your postings even if they wereOn 2025-06-12 15:19:58 +0000, olcott said:I want people to be able to validate my work 50 years after I am dead.
On 6/12/2025 3:10 AM, Mikko wrote:Nothing is permanent. But you can (and to some extent do) maintan a webOn 2025-06-11 14:20:39 +0000, olcott said:A web-page is not a permanent archive.
On 6/11/2025 3:56 AM, Mikko wrote:Putting them to a web page would achieve the same with lesser effort.On 2025-06-10 16:51:49 +0000, olcott said:I USE CUT-AND-PASTE MAKING SURE THAT
On 6/10/2025 2:12 AM, Mikko wrote:If you don't tell why you do so why would anyone else?On 2025-06-08 05:38:26 +0000, olcott said:Why do people always have to be damned liars and change
On 6/8/2025 12:20 AM, Mikko wrote:Depends on what exactly your "can" and "possibly" mean. Anyway, DDD doesOn 2025-06-07 13:51:33 +0000, olcott said:*CAN'T POSSIBLY REACH A FINAL STATE DOES ESTABLISH NOT HALTING*
On 6/7/2025 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote:One can, much like you can imagine the coherent set of properties ofOn 2025-06-06 16:17:48 +0000, olcott said:If that was true then one could imagine the
On 6/6/2025 3:57 AM, Mikko wrote:No, it is not the same. Being of ones own father is impossible becauseOn 2025-06-04 15:59:10 +0000, olcott said:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urelement#Quine_atoms
On 6/4/2025 2:19 AM, Mikko wrote:No, it is not. It is a set that one can assume to exist or not to exist.On 2025-06-03 20:00:51 +0000, olcott said:Quine's atom is nonsense.
On 6/3/2025 12:59 PM, wij wrote:To a large extent it is. Both are intended to describe those sets thatOn Tue, 2025-06-03 at 16:38 +0100, Mike Terry wrote:Likewise ZFC was not about what is now called naive set theory.On 03/06/2025 13:45, dbush wrote:People seem to keep addressing the logic of the implement of POOH, but it does not matter howOn 6/2/2025 10:58 PM, Mike Terry wrote:Right - magical thinking.Even if presented with /direct observations/ contradicting his position, PO can (will) justMy favorite is that the directly executed D(D) doesn't halt even though it looks like it does:
invent
new magical thinking that only he is smart enough to understand, in order to somehow justify his
busted intuitions.
On 1/24/24 19:18, olcott wrote:
> The directly executed D(D) reaches a final state and exits normally.
> BECAUSE ANOTHER ASPECT OF THE SAME COMPUTATION HAS BEEN ABORTED,
> Thus meeting the correct non-halting criteria if any step of
> a computation must be aborted to prevent its infinite execution
> then this computation DOES NOT HALT (even if it looks like it does).
PO simply cannot clearly think through what's going on, due to the multiple levels involved. In his
head they all become a mush of confustions, but the mystery here is why PO does not /realise/ that
he can't think his way through it?
When I try something that's beyond me, I soon realise I'm not up to it. Somehow PO tries, gets into
a total muddle, and concludes "My understanding of this goes beyond that of everybody else, due to
my powers of unrivalved concentration equalled by almost nobody on the planet, and my ability to
eliminate extraneous complexity". How did PO ever start down this path of delusions? Not that that
matters one iota... :)
Mike.
H or D are implemented, because:
1. POOH is not about the Halting Problem (no logical connection)
were tought to be usefult to think about. But the naive set theory failed
because it is inconsistent. However, ZF excludes some sets that some
people want to consider, e.g., the universal set, Quine's atom. There is
no agreement whether do not satisfy the axiom of choice and its various
consequences should be included or excluded, so both ZF and ZFC are used.
It is the same as every person that is their own father.
of the say the material world works. Imaginary things like sets can be
imagined to work wichever way one wants to imagine, though a consitent
imagination is more useful.
coherent set of properties of a square circle.
an impossible decider.
reach its final state, so its wrong to say that it can't.
my words and then dishonestly apply their rebuttal to
these changed words.
MY WORDS ARE PERFECTLY UNCHANGED.
page as long as you need it for usenet discussions.
A web-page will not work for this.
on some web page or a paper or a stone wall. Even if someone happens
to see some of your writings nobody will ever validate anything they
see there.
verified earlier that 50 years after your death may be facts but not
verified facts.
gave me an actual honest review.
Instead of any honest review people are so sure thatYou are right. At least some of your errors are so obvious that
I must be wrong that they spent 99% of their concentration
on rebuttal and less than 1% on understanding what I am saying.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.