Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH

On 2/17/2025 10:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 2/17/25 10:54 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/17/2025 6:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 2/17/25 3:25 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/17/2025 2:16 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 17.feb.2025 om 18:11 schreef olcott:

On 2/17/2025 9:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 17.feb.2025 om 15:06 schreef olcott:

>
When the problem definition is specify the algorithm
for correctly encoding a correct geometric square circle
then rejecting the original problem definition is the only
correct option.
>
The inability to correctly encode such as algorithm
places no actual limit on computation.
>

>
So, Olcott thinks that by changing the definitions he can create an algorithm to encode a correct geometric square circle

>
*I didn't say anything like that*
That you said that did does not seem like any honest mistake.
>

>
But it is just as isomorphic to what you said as your "termination analyzer" is to the Halting Problem.

>
THAT IS NOT THE TOPIC OF THE ABOVE REPLY.
>

  Of course it is, YOU claim he is wrong because you didn't say what he said you implied, but your statement *IS* Isomorphic to it in a sense.
 

I did not even use the term isomorphic in the above.
I will start trimming the posts much more.
*Stay within the precise context of my exact reply*
The problem of defining the algorithm to encode an actual
square circle can only be correctly rejected as nonsense.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer