Ben Bacarisse inaccurate disparagement of my work

[olcott]

Two PhD computer science professors independently (of my work)
affirm my 2004 statement.

*Problems with the Halting Problem* Eric C.R. Hehner (2011)
COMPUTING2011 Symposium on 75 years of Turing Machine and
Lambda-Calculus, Karlsruhe Germany, invited, 2011 October 20-21;
Advances in Computer Science and Engineering v.10 n.1 p.31-60, 2013
https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/PHP.pdf

E C R Hehner. *Objective and Subjective Specifications*
WST Workshop on Termination, Oxford. 2018 July 18.
See https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/OSS.pdf

Bill Stoddart. *The Halting Paradox*
20 December 2017
https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05340
arXiv:1906.05340 [cs.LO]

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed (PART-TWO) sci.logic
On 6/20/2004 11:31 AM, Peter Olcott wrote:
> PREMISES:
> (1) The Halting Problem was specified in such a way that a solution
> was defined to be impossible.
>
> (2) The set of questions that are defined to not have any possible
> correct answer(s) forms a proper subset of all possible questions.
> …
> CONCLUSION:
> Therefore the Halting Problem is an ill-formed question.
>
USENET Message-ID:
<kZiBc.103407$Gx4....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[Richard Damon]

And both of your "Computer Science Professors" prove that they don't
understand what a "Computation" is, and thus are not "Authorities" in
the field, and thus there "support" is worthless.

Finding a couple other people making the same mistake doesn't make it
not a mistake.

[Mikko]

Nothing mentioned above is a disparagement of your "work".
Nothing mentioned above is related to Ben Bacarisse.

Your "work" is inaccurate disparagement of accomplishments
of various authors (and, to a lesser extent, those authors
themselves).

--
Mikko

[olcott]

I am referring to Ben's recent posts. Ben is disparaging my
current position on the basis of things that I have said about
my prior position and he is doing this without even looking
at my current position. Ben also uses the ad hominem attack
in one of his rebuttals.

> Nothing mentioned above is related to Ben Bacarisse.
>
> Your "work" is inaccurate disparagement of accomplishments
> of various authors (and, to a lesser extent, those authors
> themselves).
>

This paper of mine shows how the above two authors support
my 2004 position (also included in this paper) by direct
quotes from these two author's supporting this position.
I have a fifty email exchange with one of these authors
ensuring that we do agree.

Does the halting problem place an actual limit on computation?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374806722_Does_the_halting_problem_place_an_actual_limit_on_computation

[Ben Bacarisse]

Mikko <mikko....@iki.fi> writes:

> On 2024-02-20 15:58:59 +0000, olcott said:

<stuff...>

> Nothing mentioned above is a disparagement of your "work".
> Nothing mentioned above is related to Ben Bacarisse.

PO needs people to reply. He will try anything to get us to talk to
him, and insulting people has worked in the past.

Try not replying for a month. If everyone did this, he would have to go
elsewhere. Replies are his oxygen. Of course, you must be prepared to
ignore the insults and lies he will post about you. But that's easy.
No on believes a word he says anymore.

--
Ben.

[immibis]

So why are you replying?

Perhaps we should all ignore-file you, to fulfil your fantasy.

[olcott]

Ben did verify that my encoding is correct:

// Linz Turing machine H --- H applied to ⟨H⟩
H.q0 ⟨H⟩ ⟨H⟩ ⊢* H.qy // H applied to ⟨H⟩ halts
H.q0 ⟨H⟩ ⟨H⟩ ⊢* H.qn // H applied to ⟨H⟩ does not halt
Do you halt on your own Turing Machine description ?

Of the infinite set of implementations of H every one that
transitions to H.qy derives an answer consistent with the
behavior of H.

[olcott]

On 2/21/2024 12:26 PM, Mikko wrote:

> No such reference in OP.
>

Every 2024-02 post where Ben refers to me <is> a
disparagement of my work. Some of them were as vague
as ad hominem attacks.

[Ben Bacarisse]

I haven't replied to PO for ages. He may reply to me (I don't know) but
I decided not to engage with him after his insults became totally
unacceptable. I /should/ have stopped long before that so I do
understand the appeal those pointless exchanges.

> Perhaps we should all ignore-file you, to fulfil your fantasy.

By all means. I may well continue to suggest people not spend any time
trying to get PO to see reason so it would make perfect sense to filter
out my posts if you have come to some other conclusion about it.

--
Ben.

[Mikko]

--
Mikko

[olcott]

In is not in the OP it is every post that Ben has posted
that refers to me in 2024-02.