sci.logic

Liste des Groupes Pages :1234567891011121314151617181920
Date Sujet#  Auteur
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i        `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i         `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error5Mike Terry
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i          `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error4olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i           +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i           `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i            `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error49olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i    +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error47olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis45olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis13Python
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis12olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis7Python
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis6olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis4olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i  +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis ---2olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i   `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis ---1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii `* Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis3olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  +- Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1news2
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  `- Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis24olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii+- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?22olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?21Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?20olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?19Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?18olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii     `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?17Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii      `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?16olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii       `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?15Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii        `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?14olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii         `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?13Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii          `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?12olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii           `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?11Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii            `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?10olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii             `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?9Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii              `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?8olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii               `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?7Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?6olcott
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                 `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?5Richard Damon
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?4olcott
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?3Richard Damon
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?2olcott
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                     `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis6joes
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis5olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     i  +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     i  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis3Python
8 Jun 24 i ii i     i   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis2olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     i    `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i ii `- Re: Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts1Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i i`* Halting Problem is wrong two different ways37olcott
4 Jun 24 i i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
5 Jun 24 i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways29Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways28olcott
5 Jun 24 i i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways16John Smith
5 Jun 24 i i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways15olcott
5 Jun 24 i i i i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways13John Smith
5 Jun 24 i i i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways12olcott
5 Jun 24 i i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3John Smith
5 Jun 24 i i i i   i+- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
5 Jun 24 i i i i   i`- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
5 Jun 24 i i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5joes
6 Jun 24 i i i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid4olcott
6 Jun 24 i i i i   i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i i i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid2olcott
7 Jun 24 i i i i   i  `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i i i i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i i i i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
7 Jun 24 i i i i    `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i i i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways10Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways9olcott
5 Jun 24 i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
6 Jun 24 i i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i i i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4olcott
6 Jun 24 i i i   i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i i i   i    +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
6 Jun 24 i i i   i    `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
6 Jun 24 i i i   `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
5 Jun 24 i i  +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
6 Jun 24 i i  +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i i  +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
7 Jun 24 i i  i`- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i i  `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
3 Jun 24 i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?20Fred. Zwarts
3 Jun 24  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?19Mike Terry
3 Jun 24   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?18olcott
3 Jun 24    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?17Mike Terry
3 Jun 24     +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- woeful ignorance1olcott
4 Jun 24     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?15olcott
4 Jun 24      +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?13Richard Damon
4 Jun 24      i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?12olcott
4 Jun 24      i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?11Richard Damon
4 Jun 24      i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?10olcott
4 Jun 24      i   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?9Richard Damon
4 Jun 24      i    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?8olcott
4 Jun 24      i     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?7Richard Damon
4 Jun 24      i      `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?6olcott
4 Jun 24      i       `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?5Richard Damon
4 Jun 24      i        `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?4olcott
5 Jun 24      i         +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24      i         `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?2Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24      i          `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1olcott
4 Jun 24      `- Re: Why is Olcott so ignorant, anyway?1immibis
7 Jun 24 * Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria7olcott
7 Jun 24 +* Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria2Python
7 Jun 24 i`- Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria1olcott
7 Jun 24 +- Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 `* Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria3Fred. Zwarts
8 Jun 24  `* Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria2olcott
8 Jun 24   `- Re: Proof that DD correctly simulated by HH provides the correct halt status criteria1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 * At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact100olcott
5 Jun 24 +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact95Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact94olcott
5 Jun 24 i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact93Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact92olcott
5 Jun 24 i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact91Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i    `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact90olcott
5 Jun 24 i     +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact85Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i     i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact84olcott
5 Jun 24 i     i +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Mikko
5 Jun 24 i     i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact82Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i     i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact81olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact79Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact78olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact76Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact75olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact74Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact73olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact72Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i    `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact71olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i     `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact70Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i      `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact69olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i       `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact68Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i        `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact67olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i         `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact66Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i          `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact65olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i           `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact64Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i            +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact57olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i+- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1wij
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact55Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact54olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact53Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard52olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard6olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard5Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard4olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard3Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i    `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard44Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard43olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard42Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard17olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  i+* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard13Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard12olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard11Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard10olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii   +* Re: Last communication with Richard2Rich Yard Daemon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii   i`- Re: Last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard7Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii    `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard6olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii     `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard5Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii      +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii      i`- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii      `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  ii       `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard3Fred. Zwarts
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  i  `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard24olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i   +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1immibis
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i   +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard21Alan Mackenzie
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i    `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard20olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1wij
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard15Alan Mackenzie
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i`* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard (we wish)14olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard (we wish)1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure12olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure11Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i   `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure10olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i    `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure9Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i     `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure8olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i      `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure7Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i       `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure6olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i        `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure5Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i         `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure4olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i          `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure3Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i           `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure2olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     i            `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact -- closure1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i     `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard2olcott
8 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    i      `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i            i    `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact --- last communication with Richard1immibis
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i            `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact6olcott
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i             `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact5Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i              +* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i              i`- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i i              `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact2olcott
7 Jun 24 i     i   i i               `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i     i   i `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Mikko
6 Jun 24 i     i   `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Mikko
6 Jun 24 i     `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact4ornott
6 Jun 24 i      `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact3olcott
6 Jun 24 i       +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1prescott
7 Jun 24 i       `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 +- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Mikko
5 Jun 24 `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact3Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24  `* Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact2olcott
5 Jun 24   `- Re: At least 100 people kept denying the easily verified fact1Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 * When Richard calls people liars he lies10olcott
6 Jun 24 +* Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies4olcott
7 Jun 24 i+- Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i`* Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies2olcott
7 Jun 24 i `- Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 +* Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies3Alan Mackenzie
7 Jun 24 i`* Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies2olcott
7 Jun 24 i `- Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 +- Re: When Richard calls people liars he lies --- this post counters defamation in this forum1olcott
7 Jun 24 `- Re: When Olcott calls people liars he lies1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 * Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly16olcott
4 Jun 24 +* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly5Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i`* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly4olcott
5 Jun 24 i `* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly3Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i  `* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly2olcott
5 Jun 24 i   `- Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly1Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 +* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry8olcott
4 Jun 24 i`* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry7Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i `* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry6olcott
6 Jun 24 i  `* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry5olcott
7 Jun 24 i   +- Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i   `* Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry3olcott
7 Jun 24 i    +- Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i    `- Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly -- Mike Terry1Mikko
5 Jun 24 +- Re: Proof that Olcott is a liar1immibis
5 Jun 24 `- Re: Proof that executed HH(DD,DD) and simulated HH(DD,DD) simulate DD correctly1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 * DD correctly simulated by HH --- never stops running without aborting its simulation12olcott

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal