Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?

From: Marc Goodman (marc.goodman_at_comcast.net)
Date: 08/17/04 

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 04:28:34 GMT

Peter Olcott wrote:
> "David C. Ullrich" <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> wrote in message news:9cj2i0dtv6pi8eht0o4u8iq05cp6m5ihjj@4ax.com...
>
>>On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:34:37 GMT, "Peter Olcott"
>><olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"David C. Ullrich" <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> wrote in message news:6ilvh01f55fp8f5lg69mlg7psl8qf7jou1@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 19:06:58 GMT, "Peter Olcott"
>>>><olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>as always, it's amazing the way you can't get anything straight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>in fact of course nobody's assuming A--->B, it's been proved.
>
>
> Not according to both myself and Marc Goodman
> "Marc Goodman" <marc.goodman@comcast.net> wrote in message news:KP6Uc.135392$8_6.34785@attbi_s04...
>

Hey! I don't even know what I'm agreeing to here.
It's like being married.

>
>
>>>>>It has not been proven in the case of my method.
>>>>>It has been proven for an entirrely different case, and assumed
>>>>>to also apply to my method. It does not apply to my method
>>>>
>>>>actually yes it does. saying "i'm not going to tell you what
>>>>the answer is" does not allow you to magically do the impossible.
>>>
>>>Its merely been presumed to be impossible.
>>
>>in precisely the same sense as the square root of 2 is merely
>>presumed to be irrational, yes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>************************
>>
>>David C. Ullrich
>>
>>sorry about the inelegant formatting - typing
>>one-handed for a few weeks...
>
>
>

Relevant Pages