• Re: Agreement that Olcott' reasoning is screwed

    From Richard Heathfield@21:1/5 to dbush on Tue Aug 26 17:07:35 2025
    On 26/08/2025 16:57, dbush wrote:
    On 8/26/2025 11:44 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 8/26/2025 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-08-19 14:51:53 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/19/2025 2:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2025-08-18 20:35:30 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

    I still haven't figured out if Olcott's obtuseness is
    wilful or innate.

    It doesn't matter. The only thing we can do is to point out
    that
    the truth is different.

    If people pay close enough attention they see that I am correct.

    People who have paid close enough attention have seen your
    mistakes.
    For example:

    On 8/18/2025 6:05 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
    It is an easily verified fact, as you love to say,
    that if DD calls HHH (as it does) and HHH calls DD
    (as, through simulation, it effectively does) that
    HHH(DD) can never halt naturally, so it will have
    to abort the recursion and report its result as 0
    - didn't halt.
    ;
    Precisely /because/ that fact is so easily verified, it is
    safe and  > correct for HHH to replace a simulated call to
    HHH(DD) with a 0, catch  > that 0 return value, and continue
    with the simulation.
    ; Since it is therefore possible for the simulation to
    continue after all,  > it is erroneous to refrain.
    ; HHH is therefore compelled to conclude:
    ; (a) that the recursion will never halt unless aborted;
    (b) the recursion must yield 0;
    (c) DD must therefore skip the if and return 0 (meaning
    that it never  > halts) while in the very act of halting.
    t; In other words, even when/if you fix your simulator,
    it will still get  > the answer wrong.


    That is agreement that
    HHH is wrong.

    I concur (and I should know, because it was me who was doing the
    agreeing).

    Like several of us, I have the courtesy to agree with Mr Olcott
    when I think he's right, but he repays it by having the gross
    discourtesy to selectively quote me out of context in the vain
    hope that he can persuade people to believe that I support his
    insane case.

    It's nothing less than intellectual fraud.


    --
    Richard Heathfield
    Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
    Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)