XPost: comp.theory, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/18/2025 6:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/18/25 12:26 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/17/2025 11:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 12/17/25 11:57 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> Counter-factual   
   >>>>   
   >>>> In computer science, termination analysis is   
   >>>> program analysis which attempts to determine   
   >>>> whether the evaluation of a given program halts   
   >>>> for each input. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termination_analysis   
   >>>   
   >>> Right, and "given" here means that its input specifies which program   
   >>> this instance is to run on.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> not programs   
   >   
   > You are just showing you don't know what the wordw mean, because as you   
   > have admitted, you retain the "right" to redefine any word you want,   
   > which means semantics are meaningless in your logic.   
   >   
      
   I checked a termination analyzer need not be correct on   
   all programs yet must be correct for all inputs for at   
   least one program. That is what those words mean.   
      
   So the minimum bar is:   
   For at least one program: correctly determine   
   "yes, this halts for all inputs" OR "no, this   
   doesn't halt for some input"   
      
   You really need to give up some of that bluster   
   it makes you look quite foolish.   
      
   > All you are doing is shouting from the mountain tops that you are just   
   > an ignorant pathological liar.   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott

   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make 
   
   "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
   
   reliably computable.

   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation
   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)