Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (PART-THREE)

From: Peter Olcott (olcott_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 06/25/04 

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 22:36:12 GMT

> > You are free to disprove this claim by counter-example.
> > You provide the answer.
>
> You made the claim! Provide evidence for it! Just because I'm not
> going to bother providing counter-examples for any claim you make
> doesn't mean that it is right.
>
> 'cid 'ooh

The absence of a counter-example is considered provisional
proof of a claim, until the counter-example arises.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Alan Turings Halting Problem is Incorrect (PART-THREE)
    ... Provide evidence for it! ... > The absence of a counter-example is considered provisional ... until the counter-example arises. ... Maybe in the social sciences. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Alan Turings Halting Problem is Incorrect (PART-THREE)
    ... > You are free to disprove this claim by counter-example. ... Provide evidence for it! ... going to bother providing counter-examples for any claim you make ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: quite an achievement
    ... Irrelevant to the Hammond case. ... Still a counter-example to your claim. ... but then there is less evidence either way. ...
    (uk.sport.cricket)
  • Re: The condition variable test
    ... You keep saying this again and again, but fail to provide any evidence. ... is your own understanding. ... removing condvar will lead to program misbehavior. ... be rather easy for you to come-up with such a counter-example yourself. ...
    (comp.programming.threads)