User blog comment:Ecl1psed276/BM2 Analysis - A Summary/@comment-25337554-20180707092442/@comment-35470197-20180708060918

@PsiCubed2

> So, why is it "believed" that BM2 never terminates? Is there any reason at all to believe this, except wishful thinking?

We can believe anything about it, because BM2 has not been explicitly defined by Bashicu himself. (The original definition of his large number has not been defined yet, either. He wrote several sentences which look like source codes of BASIC language, but they contain many compile-errors.)

The "known behaviours" of BM2 are just given by the source code of C language by Fish and "analysis" by Bashicu and other googologists with their expectation.