A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem
in [Theory]
|
From: Daryl McCullough on 21 Oct 2006 10:07 Peter Olcott says... >See that you just did it again. You don't even try to understand what I am >saying, If you actually showed that *you* understood the mathematics of the halting problem, then I would be more willing to pay careful attention to what you have to say about it. But you don't. >you merely glance at a few words before forming your refutation. Boy, if that's ever the pot calling the kettle black. You are the one who is refuting a standard theorem without attempting to understand it first. You quit reading my post after the first line that you disagree with, and then you accuse *me* of posting a reply after merely glancing at a few words. That's not true; I've read your posts and tried to understand them. You are a liar and a hypocrite. You are too lazy to actually study the subject that you claim to be providing new insight about. You are a glory hog wanting credit without doing the work. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
From: Daryl McCullough on 21 Oct 2006 10:18 Peter Olcott says... The best description of you is to say that you are >...either...dishonest or lack sufficient knowledge to >effectively communicate on this topic. I believe that both are true. You lack any knowledge of the topic you are writing about, and you are dishonest. Those are the usual earmarks of a crackpot. They lack knowledge of the subject, they lack self-honesty about their own understanding, and they lack the work ethic necesary to actually understand a topic before writing about it. That's you, Peter. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
From: Peter Olcott on 21 Oct 2006 11:15 "Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ehda79049n(a)drn.newsguy.com... > Peter Olcott says... > > The best description of you is to say that you are > >>...either...dishonest or lack sufficient knowledge to >>effectively communicate on this topic. > > I believe that both are true. You lack any knowledge > of the topic you are writing about, and you are dishonest. > Those are the usual earmarks of a crackpot. They lack > knowledge of the subject, they lack self-honesty > about their own understanding, and they lack the work > ethic necesary to actually understand a topic before > writing about it. That's you, Peter. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY > Did you read the post by the IBM research scientist that agreed with me before making this shallow assessment?
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 21 Oct 2006 11:20 Peter Olcott wrote: > "Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.koskensilta(a)xortec.fi> wrote in message > news:ZOp_g.10712$545.1166(a)reader1.news.jippii.net... >> Peter Olcott wrote: >>> So can you see how this equally applies to the UTM versions of the HP? >> What are "the UTM versions of HP"? > > Universal Turing Machine version of the Halting Problem. I figured as much. What is "Universal Turing Machine version of the Halting Problem"? -- Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)xortec.fi) "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen" - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: sillybanter on 21 Oct 2006 11:48
In comp.theory Peter Olcott <NoSpam(a)seescreen.com> wrote: > <sillybanter(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:H0b_g.42$rx.8(a)trnddc04... > > In comp.theory Peter Olcott <NoSpam(a)seescreen.com> wrote: > > Actually, that's "NewsToMe" (Usenet News - get it?). > > > > I know that, because that was me -- I've just changed ISPs and posting > > names now... > > So you are the PhD computer science professor that correctly refuted > my prior line-of-reasoning? What was the basis for this correct > refutation? Yes, I used to post under "NewsToMe", and yes I do have a PhD in Computer Science, and yes I have posted here for a long time (I've posted here for around 20 years under various names) and have even once spent time leading someone to understanding why their incorrect reasoning about the halting problem was incorrect. While I recognize your name, I can't swear that this was you earlier, to be honest... and I certainly don't remember the details of that exchange (although now that I think about it I'm fairly certain it was you - seems like we defined "PO machines" or something like that based on your initials). -- Steve Stringer sillybanter(a)gmail.com |