Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Staff meeting in the conference room in 3 minutes.


devel / comp.theory / Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

SubjectAuthor
* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ keyolcott
+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
 `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |+* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    ||`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    || `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    ||  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    ||   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    ||   |  `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    ||   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    | |     `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |     +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |      |   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |       `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |   |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |+- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Jeff Barnett
    |   |        |    |      |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Jeff Barnett
    |   |        |    |      |   |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   | `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |  `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |     `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |       +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |      |   |       |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |      |   |       `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |      |   `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |      `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |       `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |        `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |         `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |          +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |          `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |           `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |            |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Dennis Bush
    |   |        |    |            | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |            | | |`* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | | | +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Python
    |   |        |    |            | | | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            | | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            | +* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse
    |   |        |    |            | |`- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |            | `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Richard Damon
    |   |        |    |            `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |             +- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Malcolm McLean
    |   |        |    |             `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |              `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |               `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    |                `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   |        |    |                 `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        |    `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [olcott
    |   |        `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [André G. Isaak
    |   `* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [Andy Walker
    `- Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piecBen Bacarisse

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940
Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29458&group=comp.theory#29458

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben Bacarisse)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:01:36 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydabvg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<r9ydndF_Xuemx9f_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee2d88a6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w_WdndouypjXZtf_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tub87tkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<lMednU9oMbfWidb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilro7r87.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<xtmdnZF-EMLqgdb_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<877d847hkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<UeadnWsKI5oqzNb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87r16c5tm0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<4dSdnWjHVszE4tb_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87lewk5otp.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<leidnWIfpu2XBtb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k3761bq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yLWdnZ05dv-m6tH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0c33rk3.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<9OCdnd0y-MtNatH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o81e3mso.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<eI6dnePeWI_8jdD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="868cbdde2d6be9fafaea86462d662626";
logging-data="6976"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Q2Tg+WKqgWT2GiUygIcH2IjzK4iYQdRo="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SKZxuaGSX1RCkxtF52I3zLWnbHg=
sha1:0YBdrUUVlP0xG87q0FqHsMwqSbI=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.08eaeaf8ade3ea24ebaf.20220406130136BST.877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben Bacarisse - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 12:01 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 4/5/2022 10:36 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>>> The above is a system of reasoning such that the error of omission is
>>> impossible. It is the ultimate basis of all of my work.
>> I think we should put this to one side. I don't think this will help
>> you to specify and write E.
>
> We don't have to get into the details now, yet categorically
> exhaustive is the only way the problems such as this can be solved.

But the details are how you learn.

> The only way that I can show that the halting proofs are incorrect is
> to find something like a hidden false assumption buried in the proof
> that no one ever noticed before.

But that's a separate issue. I thought you wanted to learn how TMs are
specified so you had the knowledge to read and understand Linz's
specifications.

>>> I forgot to move to the last tape element of the finite string.
>>> E.q0 S ⊦* E.qy if S represents an even number
>>> E.q0 S ⊦* E.qn otherwise.
>> Yeah! That's a good forst stab at it. I'd have preferred you to say
>> what representations are to be considered (as I did for P), but I'll
>> take it.
>
> The representation is always going to be a finite string of symbols.

Specifications should really be tighter than that, but I'm not going to
push the matter.

>>>>>>>> Now actually write out, in full, a TM that meets your specification.
>>
>>> I have already fully specified E,
>>> Do you think that I can't possibly code it correctly?
>> I don't know. The point of the exercises is to get a deeper
>> understanding of what TMs are. Writing a few is essential.
>
> I might write E. To simply write E might not take very long.
> Sometimes even compiling source code can take all day.

I can wait.

--
Ben.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29459&group=comp.theory#29459

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: anw...@cuboid.co.uk (Andy Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:34:06 +0100
Organization: Not very much
Message-ID: <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="62333"; posting-host="wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Andy Walker - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 12:34 UTC

On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
[I wrote:]
>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?

Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
coming with [maths] BScs from other places.

[...]
>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.

You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Schumann

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29461&group=comp.theory#29461

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:2cf:b0:2e2:14ac:6f1b with SMTP id a15-20020a05622a02cf00b002e214ac6f1bmr7210341qtx.557.1649251743881;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 06:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:b984:0:b0:629:6b2a:8328 with SMTP id
r4-20020a25b984000000b006296b2a8328mr6731399ybg.112.1649251743630; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 06:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 06:29:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a00:23a8:400a:5601:c9b4:e706:4c2b:aa9;
posting-account=Dz2zqgkAAADlK5MFu78bw3ab-BRFV4Qn
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a00:23a8:400a:5601:c9b4:e706:4c2b:aa9
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
From: malcolm....@gmail.com (Malcolm McLean)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:29:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 32
 by: Malcolm McLean - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:29 UTC

On Wednesday, 6 April 2022 at 13:34:09 UTC+1, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> [I wrote:]
> >> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> > What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>
> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>
> [...]
> >> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> > Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> > one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>
> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>
It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he would
just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of writing such a
machine.
There's a simulator here to help things along.
https://turingmachinesimulator.com/

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29462&group=comp.theory#29462

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben Bacarisse)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 15:19:29 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="868cbdde2d6be9fafaea86462d662626";
logging-data="12347"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18JD21uQEdxryR8QT4ot7T/XC6/y8fm/2E="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nG4svuJg8wyCJvN+VIF4EM1S4X4=
sha1:oiJmNswPfvNJZJRUhOZf+Pfm02g=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.084829347118e9de5f58.20220406151929BST.87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben Bacarisse - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 14:19 UTC

Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> writes:

> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> [I wrote:]
>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>
>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>
> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.

Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
less theory in it.

> [...]
>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>
> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?

I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".

As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
despite the fact that P(P) halts), or can I find key question that they
can be shown to be avoiding. There really is not other hope.

It's a sort of challenge. With PO, I feel I have managed to do both,
but the facts he has revealed are contradictory because he has been
trying various ways to get the wrong answer past his readers. The "he
won't answer these questions" is probably the best outcome here. I
should probably stop, except for a occasion posting of those question
when he start yet another new thread.

In the past, I thought it was important to keep the record straight, but
I think everyone knows now that certain Usenet groups are just there for
the cranks to deny the theorems they dislike. I know that I'm part of
the problem...

--
Ben.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29463&group=comp.theory#29463

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben Bacarisse)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 15:29:18 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="868cbdde2d6be9fafaea86462d662626";
logging-data="12347"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19gxU2l8FzGhVV+2NwlVti+RT1ObK+ISCI="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1c8CvAYFvKwRsu/O82LhwztTNKU=
sha1:tg1Pc4hEPdcFxJ86vzCqfQZ+/HI=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.0d47f357510cb3d04206.20220406152918BST.87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben Bacarisse - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 14:29 UTC

Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:

> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he would
> just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
> notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of
> writing such a machine.

You'd think so. I wonder what the problem is. It can't be fear of
getting it wrong because he can exhaustively test it using things like:

> There's a simulator here to help things along.
> https://turingmachinesimulator.com/

and the slightly clunky one he's posted before.

I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
almost total lack of intellectual curiosity. When supervising PhD
students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.
No such worry with PO! 17 years in and he has not even read Linz's
proper proof. Never read the busy-beaver proof. Chaitin's alternative
take on this topic? Nope, nothing! As for related problems like Post's
correspondence problem, the word problem for groups, ambiguous CFGs, all
gloriously (and proudly) known to him.

--
Ben.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t2k8kn$1m2p$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29464&group=comp.theory#29464

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: anw...@cuboid.co.uk (Andy Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:38:15 +0100
Organization: Not very much
Message-ID: <t2k8kn$1m2p$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="55385"; posting-host="wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Andy Walker - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 14:38 UTC

On 06/04/2022 14:29, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he
> would just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.

I don't know why you think that's obvious. Much more fun, from
his PoV, to play dumb and have half a dozen trollees chasing around to
explain things to him [yet again].

> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the
> quintuple notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's
> capable of writing such a machine.

I expect he is; and if not, he's surely capable of writing a
C program to test whether a number is odd or even [which apparently
means "{0,2,4,6,8}"?!] or is prime. But I don't expect him to do
anything so concrete. After 17 years and 24000 articles [or however
many it is now -- he's currently running at ~20/day, ~= 7000/year],
why does anyone expect the leopard to change its spots?

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Schumann

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t2ka0o$f04$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29468&group=comp.theory#29468

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: anw...@cuboid.co.uk (Andy Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 16:01:43 +0100
Organization: Not very much
Message-ID: <t2ka0o$f04$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="15364"; posting-host="wvONfgmCjpyJD8XieLz90w.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: en-GB
 by: Andy Walker - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:01 UTC

On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
> almost total lack of intellectual curiosity. When supervising PhD
> students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
> they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
> related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.

I don't think that's confined to, or even correlated with,
crankiness. One of the most frustrating things as an educator is
to have bright students who do whatever you ask them to do, and
then say "OK, I've done that" instead of asking how it links in
with other stuff. Or, equivalently, sitting in lectures with their
arms literally or metaphorically crossed, daring you to teach them
something. The only curiosity they show is to ask "Why are we doing
this?". They think that maths [in particular -- I don't know how
far this carries over into other subjects] is simply a matter of
re-arranging symbols until the High Priest is satisfied. Luckily,
a large majority of our students, at all levels and all abilities,
weren't like that, and were a joy to teach.

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Schumann

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t7SdnX_CbaqAM9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29469&group=comp.theory#29469

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:13:33 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:13:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydabvg.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <r9ydndF_Xuemx9f_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee2d88a6.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w_WdndouypjXZtf_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tub87tkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <lMednU9oMbfWidb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilro7r87.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <xtmdnZF-EMLqgdb_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<877d847hkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <UeadnWsKI5oqzNb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87r16c5tm0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <4dSdnWjHVszE4tb_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87lewk5otp.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <leidnWIfpu2XBtb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k3761bq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <yLWdnZ05dv-m6tH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0c33rk3.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <9OCdnd0y-MtNatH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o81e3mso.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <eI6dnePeWI_8jdD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <t7SdnX_CbaqAM9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 79
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-MY0qlh+KRUX+hyBW/IXdLYxrJ9KnSHTEMJz92coJoDbIaeYyTvb+HMDvI0/tmN+P+zNqHposmRgdCvj!OXLf++BZ0ojlJxpHN5x7UdKZw76ldrp8amherDDY9bdsG1qVpaazqfIg6NqTfMWwfdBconBMEoYc!nw==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4973
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:13 UTC

On 4/6/2022 7:01 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 4/5/2022 10:36 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>>> The above is a system of reasoning such that the error of omission is
>>>> impossible. It is the ultimate basis of all of my work.
>>> I think we should put this to one side. I don't think this will help
>>> you to specify and write E.
>>
>> We don't have to get into the details now, yet categorically
>> exhaustive is the only way the problems such as this can be solved.
>
> But the details are how you learn.
>

When the area of investigation is divided up into a hierarchy of
mutually exclusive categories the error of omission can be infallibly
eliminated. This systematically exposes every gap in reasoning that no
one ever noticed before.

>> The only way that I can show that the halting proofs are incorrect is
>> to find something like a hidden false assumption buried in the proof
>> that no one ever noticed before.
>
> But that's a separate issue.

No it is not. People are not paying attention to what I say because they
have already made up their mind that it is impossible that I am correct.
The way that it is possible that I am correct is that I found a hidden
false assumption in all the proofs.

> I thought you wanted to learn how TMs are
> specified so you had the knowledge to read and understand Linz's
> specifications.
>

Not at all. I already understand this better than you do. We only need
the lingua franca so that you can see that I understand this better than
you do.

>>>> I forgot to move to the last tape element of the finite string.
>>>> E.q0 S ⊦* E.qy if S represents an even number
>>>> E.q0 S ⊦* E.qn otherwise.
>>> Yeah! That's a good forst stab at it. I'd have preferred you to say
>>> what representations are to be considered (as I did for P), but I'll
>>> take it.
>>
>> The representation is always going to be a finite string of symbols.
>
> Specifications should really be tighter than that, but I'm not going to
> push the matter.
>

Since the sum total of human conceptual knowledge is finite string
transformation rules applied to finite strings a finite string is the
only data type ever needed.

>>>>>>>>> Now actually write out, in full, a TM that meets your specification.
>>>
>>>> I have already fully specified E,
>>>> Do you think that I can't possibly code it correctly?
>>> I don't know. The point of the exercises is to get a deeper
>>> understanding of what TMs are. Writing a few is essential.
>>
>> I might write E. To simply write E might not take very long.
>> Sometimes even compiling source code can take all day.
>
> I can wait.
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t7SdnX7CbaqlMtD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29470&group=comp.theory#29470

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:18:15 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:18:15 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2ka0o$f04$1@gioia.aioe.org>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t2ka0o$f04$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <t7SdnX7CbaqlMtD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 36
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-qPyirOjuwRnNKEk6SY4GuRbhy9xF0JWyFO2E8k5SE/s+SY+ndvcSGxzdSY19cOwKtp3vfC5+xle78rT!Og9xi0q9Yift0ZyrUFP9RrtWno31VP72W1dfWtOl91Ux/n2t2dQkJ+BTXqhLuTK/CXXDG+ndfav8!Ng==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3684
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:18 UTC

On 4/6/2022 10:01 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
>> almost total lack of intellectual curiosity.  When supervising PhD
>> students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
>> they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
>> related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.
>
>     I don't think that's confined to, or even correlated with,
> crankiness.  One of the most frustrating things as an educator is
> to have bright students who do whatever you ask them to do, and
> then say "OK, I've done that" instead of asking how it links in
> with other stuff.  Or, equivalently, sitting in lectures with their
> arms literally or metaphorically crossed, daring you to teach them
> something.  The only curiosity they show is to ask "Why are we doing
> this?".  They think that maths [in particular -- I don't know how
> far this carries over into other subjects] is simply a matter of
> re-arranging symbols until the High Priest is satisfied.  Luckily,
> a large majority of our students, at all levels and all abilities,
> weren't like that, and were a joy to teach.
>

The other key about "cranks" is that people are so sure that they must
be wrong that the never pay enough attention to see that they are
correct because minds have already been made up and closed.

The actual execution trace of the simulated input: ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ to embedded_H
conclusively proves that it would never reach its own final state under
any condition what-so-ever thus must be rejected by embedded_H.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29473&group=comp.theory#29473

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:28:59 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:28:58 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 56
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Mex7QdhyVTGewWvypbsU/zve35C2qP2oU+LcYBfbSofncgPe4zsKL1yYbl65wLVgxYruCg/OXKjDsY5!IK/LSGbfo6WD/B/giUEdhoyikBYLntJOp3Xzy3wrEXRLiRC6xwPu3xhh9Q6bJ7MNzxAJAhMBx6gu!Eg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4403
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:28 UTC

On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>
>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> [I wrote:]
>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>
>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>
>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>
> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> less theory in it.
>
>> [...]
>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>
>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>
> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>
> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> despite the fact that P(P) halts),

If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.

If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29476&group=comp.theory#29476

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7dc8:0:b0:2e1:b3ec:6666 with SMTP id c8-20020ac87dc8000000b002e1b3ec6666mr8327047qte.556.1649263398933;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:6191:0:b0:63c:92df:66c6 with SMTP id
v139-20020a256191000000b0063c92df66c6mr6604075ybb.242.1649263398745; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.165.242; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.165.242
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 16:43:18 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 74
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 16:43 UTC

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> > Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
> >
> >> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >> [I wrote:]
> >>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> >>>
> >>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
> >>
> >> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> >> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> >> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> >> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> >> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> >> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> >> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
> >
> > Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> > any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
> > general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> > but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> > less theory in it.
> >
> >> [...]
> >>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> >>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> >>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
> >>
> >> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> >> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
> >
> > I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
> >
> > As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> > of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> > they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> > despite the fact that P(P) halts),
> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>
> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.

What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.

You may in fact have a white dog in your living room, and people do agree with that, but no one cares because they want to know if there is a black cat in your kitchen.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29477&group=comp.theory#29477

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!CC3uK9WYEoa7s1kzH7komw.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: news.dea...@darjeeling.plus.com (Mike Terry)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:54:18 +0100
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="64736"; posting-host="CC3uK9WYEoa7s1kzH7komw.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/60.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.7.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Mike Terry - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 16:54 UTC

On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he would
>> just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
>> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
>> notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of
>> writing such a machine.
>
> You'd think so. I wonder what the problem is. It can't be fear of
> getting it wrong because he can exhaustively test it using things like:

I think he simply doesn't see the point in wasting his time on it.

Is PO cooperating in this learning exercise because he understands that he doesn't know enough about
TMs to make arguments about them? Or that he is intellectually curious about them and wants to
understand the fundamentals better?

I don't think anything like that applies - PO believes that his claims are correct, and that other
people don't agree /because of the language he is using/ to express the claims. He believes that by
cooperating with you, he might learn the Right Way to express his claims, then you and everybody
else will understand him and agree he is correct. I.e. he wants to "learn the right words to say"
rather than "learn the fundamental concepts involved".

PO probably realises that constructing an actual TM will not give him any "handy new words" that
will convince anyone that his claims are correct - and he's quite right in that respect. So why
waste time on it? (Purely from /his/ perspective.) I suppose he might do it if he thought he would
learn the Right Words in lesson 2, and that you wouldn't give him lesson 2 unless he writes the TM
you want in lesson 1...

>
>> There's a simulator here to help things along.
>> https://turingmachinesimulator.com/
>
> and the slightly clunky one he's posted before.
>
> I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
> almost total lack of intellectual curiosity. When supervising PhD
> students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
> they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
> related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.
> No such worry with PO! 17 years in and he has not even read Linz's
> proper proof. Never read the busy-beaver proof. Chaitin's alternative
> take on this topic? Nope, nothing! As for related problems like Post's
> correspondence problem, the word problem for groups, ambiguous CFGs, all
> gloriously (and proudly) known to him.
>

"gloriously /unknown/ to him" :)

I agree PO has no intellectual interest in any of this. His purpose is self-serving: he needs to be
recognised as a genius so that Doug Lenat will offer him a job that he was once turned down for, and
he can get on with being the first person to create a "human mind in a computer" etc.. (hehe) Of
course that oportunity vanished years (decades) ago, but PO continues regardless. [Again, from PO's
perspective - in reality the opportunity was never there in the first place.]

In his delusional world, he probably sees his legacy as ushering in a Brave New World of AI, while
the truth is he knows as little about AI as he does mathematics, logic, CS, language theory and so
on. (Probably less in fact...) The HP result has ZERO impact on the practical development of AI,
although I suppose it does input into philosphical debates on the nature of consciousness.

Mike.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29478&group=comp.theory#29478

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:59:08 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 11:59:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 79
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-oOWNxKluqV+GbAMFaacwftQ8OulUsEeV0qBmrG8Ft0LRODxT4RFYz7LB5hIlVPk6wR1IcUG2nw2G0CO!3GOLVsYgCDIDnYa/6xQasrbkSxmEOEUnjMlo/hJNYSMa/WaeK1+tfLYCB0XyS0XE5uFXkeqmvw6h!OQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5693
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 16:59 UTC

On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> [I wrote:]
>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>>>
>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>>>
>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
>>> less theory in it.
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>>>
>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>>>
>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>>>
>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>>
>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
>
> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
>

>> If it is the case that the

CORRECTLY

>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then

computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore

>> H correctly
>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.

> You may in fact have a white dog in your living room, and people do agree with that, but no one cares because they want to know if there is a black cat in your kitchen.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<MpKdnf2E552QVdD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29479&group=comp.theory#29479

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 12:04:13 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 12:04:12 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <MpKdnf2E552QVdD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 45
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-msDwcCJxvBn+4wfaZMTAcsXDEWC05WcRJIQ7F0JEnpd8RQQm17WkWpvVUpzu14BiGo0Ueds17WHSIoc!sGKzgZrFmHzezHpKUat8goKbFQaUmfwAA+/w7Lm/bt6/+npg/p9HL9gDb4fnX5aAXL479kr/+U6D!nQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3798
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:04 UTC

On 4/6/2022 11:54 AM, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he
>>> would
>>> just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
>>> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
>>> notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of
>>> writing such a machine.
>>
>> You'd think so.  I wonder what the problem is.  It can't be fear of
>> getting it wrong because he can exhaustively test it using things like:
>
> I think he simply doesn't see the point in wasting his time on it.
>
> Is PO cooperating in this learning exercise because he understands that
> he doesn't know enough about TMs to make arguments about them?  Or that
> he is intellectually curious about them and wants to understand the
> fundamentals better?
>
> I don't think anything like that applies - PO believes that his claims
> are correct, and that other people don't agree /because of the language
> he is using/ to express the claims.  He believes that by cooperating
> with you, he might learn the Right Way to express his claims, then you
> and everybody else will understand him and agree he is correct.  I.e. he
> wants to "learn the right words to say" rather than "learn the
> fundamental concepts involved".
>
> PO probably realises that constructing an actual TM will not give him
> any "handy new words" that will convince anyone that his claims are
> correct - and he's quite right in that respect.  So why waste time on
> it?  (Purely from /his/ perspective.)

Yes that is exactly correct. My Version(11) parallel dialogue focuses on
"the right words" and nothing else.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29480&group=comp.theory#29480

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:4104:b0:42c:1db0:da28 with SMTP id kc4-20020a056214410400b0042c1db0da28mr8406400qvb.67.1649264843516;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a81:a10b:0:b0:2eb:736b:6fb4 with SMTP id
y11-20020a81a10b000000b002eb736b6fb4mr8233591ywg.161.1649264843345; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 10:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:07:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.165.242; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.165.242
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 17:07:23 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 110
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:07 UTC

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>> [I wrote:]
> >>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> >>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> >>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> >>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> >>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> >>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> >>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
> >>>
> >>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> >>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
> >>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> >>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> >>> less theory in it.
> >>>
> >>>> [...]
> >>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> >>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> >>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
> >>>>
> >>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> >>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
> >>>
> >>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
> >>>
> >>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> >>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> >>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> >>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
> >> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
> >> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> >> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
> >>
> >> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
> >> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
> >
> > What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
> >
>
> >> If it is the case that the
> CORRECTLY
> >> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore

The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.

If H (or more specifically Ha) is correct to abort <Ha^><Ha^>, then Ha3 (a halt decider whose halt status criteria is any more than 3 steps) is correct to abort <N><5> (where N runs for exactly 5 steps) for the same reason. Ha can't simulate <Ha^><Ha^> to a final state in any of the finite number of steps it simulates, and Ha3 can't simulate <N><5> to a final state in any of the finite number of steps it simulates.

> >> H correctly
> >> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> >> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
> > You may in fact have a white dog in your living room, and people do agree with that, but no one cares because they want to know if there is a black cat in your kitchen.
> --
> Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott
>
> "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> Genius hits a target no one else can see."
> Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29481&group=comp.theory#29481

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 12:49:36 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 12:49:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 77
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-utUNRgYBrA8SIv+V9PCWj39xiIxu72SBqKw+fgERPigeD5FHXRRKec45lzHrLDKuHi7G4omze2meZHQ!C089CChHjBlf9nnKdCfiUhh++7YizokaCsbKJGWAtyCNrsBtyOxtcc/NdC1qUjU+85jWvL0SM2jj!Pw==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 6013
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:49 UTC

On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>> [I wrote:]
>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
>>>>> less theory in it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>>>>>
>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>>>>
>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
>>>
>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
>>>
>>
>>>> If it is the case that the
>> CORRECTLY
>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
>
> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
>
Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.

Intuitively it seems that they must be the same. When the actual steps
are laid out it is obvious that they are not the same.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29482&group=comp.theory#29482

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:57d6:0:b0:2e0:68af:7c52 with SMTP id w22-20020ac857d6000000b002e068af7c52mr8423979qta.380.1649267703952;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a0d:d5c3:0:b0:2e5:cc05:1789 with SMTP id
x186-20020a0dd5c3000000b002e5cc051789mr7878275ywd.472.1649267703797; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 10:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.165.242; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.165.242
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 17:55:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 111
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:55 UTC

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>> [I wrote:]
> >>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> >>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> >>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> >>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> >>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> >>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> >>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> >>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
> >>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> >>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> >>>>> less theory in it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> >>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> >>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> >>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> >>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> >>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> >>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
> >>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
> >>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> >>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
> >>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
> >>>
> >>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
> >>>
> >>
> >>>> If it is the case that the
> >> CORRECTLY
> >>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
> >> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
> >> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
> >
> > The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
> >
> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.

Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?", not "Is H able to simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state". By definition, the "sequence of configurations" is the same.

>
> Intuitively it seems that they must be the same. When the actual steps
> are laid out it is obvious that they are not the same.
> --
> Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott
>
> "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> Genius hits a target no one else can see."
> Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29483&group=comp.theory#29483

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:05:29 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:05:28 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 84
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-c4yJsuyVa5VLpxeTXHI93AwG38W8mYKBlOsELsn2Rs3yxYnZsWCTtI3BSxBL/04QY8R4qW1VRa/aGDX!8njfJtSSoeIKaDmqu9vxc4vsaLc4el64vaAYqxNiE/2NpNDeo1truj4ytBBoN0SuVuyqhME4KS0P!Pg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 6585
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:05 UTC

On 4/6/2022 12:55 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>> [I wrote:]
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>>>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>>>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>>>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>>>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>>>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>>>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
>>>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
>>>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
>>>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
>>>>>>> less theory in it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>>>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
>>>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
>>>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
>>>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
>>>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
>>>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>>>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
>>>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
>>>>>
>>>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> If it is the case that the
>>>> CORRECTLY
>>>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
>>>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
>>>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
>>>
>>> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
>>>
>> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
>> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.
>
> Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?",

No that is not the freaking question you freaking nitwit.

The question is: Does the input specify a sequence of configurations
that would reach their own final state?

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29484&group=comp.theory#29484

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:21d4:b0:67d:6a35:5dff with SMTP id h20-20020a05620a21d400b0067d6a355dffmr6669711qka.747.1649269125156;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:18:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:850b:0:b0:623:ae50:9d7d with SMTP id
w11-20020a25850b000000b00623ae509d7dmr7277158ybk.326.1649269124872; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 11:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 11:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.165.242; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.165.242
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
<1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 18:18:45 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 123
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:18 UTC

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:05:36 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 12:55 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>>>> [I wrote:]
> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >>>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >>>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> >>>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> >>>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> >>>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> >>>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> >>>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> >>>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> >>>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
> >>>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> >>>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> >>>>>>> less theory in it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >>>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >>>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> >>>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> >>>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> >>>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> >>>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> >>>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> >>>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
> >>>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
> >>>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> >>>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
> >>>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> If it is the case that the
> >>>> CORRECTLY
> >>>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
> >>>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
> >>>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
> >>>
> >>> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
> >>>
> >> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
> >> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.
> >
> > Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?",
> No that is not the freaking question you freaking nitwit.
>
> The question is: Does the input specify a sequence of configurations
> that would reach their own final state?

FALSE. From Linz:

---
A solution of the halting problem is a Turing machine
H, which for any <M> and <w>, performs the computation

H.q0 ⟨M⟩⟨w⟩ ⊦* H.qy

if M applied to <w> halts, and

H.q0 ⟨M⟩⟨w⟩ ⊦* H.qn

if M applied to <w> does not halt.
---

So YES it is the question. You just don't want it to be because it means you don't have a case.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<LIKdnZFFlsltRtD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29485&group=comp.theory#29485

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:29:04 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:29:03 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
<1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <LIKdnZFFlsltRtD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 97
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-bvtO3/2KOkKBiCdRVhcAnzkGBpPx2YjyHHYyPSSe4aqKpmF41qbdrM5AdwaeE8RqNAho82OsW4VdPiZ!nR8y96hSQb2eiHJoO62lqX+Bj9a77f3TxWmOc00qRnz3wU1Qy6ZjFDC7yImU1pCBNVBAndVQEEGw!Pg==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 7248
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:29 UTC

On 4/6/2022 1:18 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:05:36 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/6/2022 12:55 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [I wrote:]
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>>>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>>>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>>>>>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>>>>>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>>>>>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>>>>>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>>>>>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>>>>>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
>>>>>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
>>>>>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
>>>>>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
>>>>>>>>> less theory in it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>>>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>>>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>>>>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>>>>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>>>>>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
>>>>>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
>>>>>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
>>>>>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
>>>>>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
>>>>>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>>>>>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
>>>>>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If it is the case that the
>>>>>> CORRECTLY
>>>>>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
>>>>>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
>>>>>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
>>>>>
>>>>> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
>>>>>
>>>> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
>>>> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.
>>>
>>> Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?",
>> No that is not the freaking question you freaking nitwit.
>>
>> The question is: Does the input specify a sequence of configurations
>> that would reach their own final state?
>
> FALSE. From Linz:
>
Linz is wrong too.
Because we know that a halt decider must compute the mapping

FROM ITS INPUTS
FROM ITS INPUTS
FROM ITS INPUTS
FROM ITS INPUTS

Anyone that says it must compute the mapping from non-inputs such as Ĥ
applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ IS FREAKING WRONG !!!

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<fb84785d-5d77-4482-9974-eaa4f4e86483n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29486&group=comp.theory#29486

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5de4:0:b0:443:5d80:e379 with SMTP id jn4-20020ad45de4000000b004435d80e379mr8204807qvb.37.1649270074585;
Wed, 06 Apr 2022 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:d7cd:0:b0:63e:4e0c:371f with SMTP id
o196-20020a25d7cd000000b0063e4e0c371fmr585514ybg.605.1649270074374; Wed, 06
Apr 2022 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 11:34:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <LIKdnZFFlsltRtD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.165.242; posting-account=ejFcQgoAAACAt5i0VbkATkR2ACWdgADD
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.165.242
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
<1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>
<LIKdnZFFlsltRtD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <fb84785d-5d77-4482-9974-eaa4f4e86483n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
From: dbush.mo...@gmail.com (Dennis Bush)
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 18:34:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 139
 by: Dennis Bush - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:34 UTC

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:29:11 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 4/6/2022 1:18 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> > On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:05:36 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >> On 4/6/2022 12:55 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> [I wrote:]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
> >>>>>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
> >>>>>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
> >>>>>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
> >>>>>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
> >>>>>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
> >>>>>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
> >>>>>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
> >>>>>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever.. In
> >>>>>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
> >>>>>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
> >>>>>>>>> less theory in it.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
> >>>>>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
> >>>>>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
> >>>>>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
> >>>>>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
> >>>>>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
> >>>>>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
> >>>>>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
> >>>>>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
> >>>>>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
> >>>>>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
> >>>>>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
> >>>>>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If it is the case that the
> >>>>>> CORRECTLY
> >>>>>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
> >>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
> >>>>>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
> >>>>>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
> >>>> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.
> >>>
> >>> Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?",
> >> No that is not the freaking question you freaking nitwit.
> >>
> >> The question is: Does the input specify a sequence of configurations
> >> that would reach their own final state?
> >
> > FALSE. From Linz:
> >
> Linz is wrong too.

Nope. The above is a stipulative definition.

It is incorrect to disagree with stipulative definitions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipulative_definition

Disagreeing with a stipulative definition is like disagreeing with
arithmetic.

When in BASIC we say let X = 5,
disagreeing that X has the value of 5 is incorrect.

> Because we know that a halt decider must compute the mapping
>
> FROM ITS INPUTS
> FROM ITS INPUTS
> FROM ITS INPUTS
> FROM ITS INPUTS
>
> Anyone that says it must compute the mapping from non-inputs such as Ĥ
> applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ IS FREAKING WRONG !!!

You're wrong because you're disagreeing with a stipulative definition.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<87h776gipq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29487&group=comp.theory#29487

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben Bacarisse)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 19:38:57 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <87h776gipq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="868cbdde2d6be9fafaea86462d662626";
logging-data="21618"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19zs6eyln7BcFyghbELsp+zJnYlsKnKLRo="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SLjTRtCK9zLmEqTzFLet7sqD9uo=
sha1:I1ncYzqajdNLK/kAEqhAi3jYkY0=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.87eaf652c5a51761298c.20220406193857BST.87h776gipq.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben Bacarisse - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:38 UTC

Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> writes:

> On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he would
>>> just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
>>> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
>>> notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of
>>> writing such a machine.
>> You'd think so. I wonder what the problem is. It can't be fear of
>> getting it wrong because he can exhaustively test it using things like:
>
> I think he simply doesn't see the point in wasting his time on it.
>
> Is PO cooperating in this learning exercise because he understands
> that he doesn't know enough about TMs to make arguments about them?
> Or that he is intellectually curious about them and wants to
> understand the fundamentals better?
>
> I don't think anything like that applies - PO believes that his claims
> are correct, and that other people don't agree /because of the
> language he is using/ to express the claims. He believes that by
> cooperating with you, he might learn the Right Way to express his
> claims, then you and everybody else will understand him and agree he
> is correct. I.e. he wants to "learn the right words to say" rather
> than "learn the fundamental concepts involved".

Sure. He's said that quite explicitly.

> PO probably realises that constructing an actual TM will not give him
> any "handy new words" that will convince anyone that his claims are
> correct - and he's quite right in that respect. So why waste time on
> it? (Purely from /his/ perspective.) I suppose he might do it if he
> thought he would learn the Right Words in lesson 2, and that you
> wouldn't give him lesson 2 unless he writes the TM you want in lesson
> 1...

That's the plan. I want an actual fully encoded TM as example to set
exercises about specifying TM's that (informally) decide things about
TMs and TM computations.

But I admit I am used to this going so much faster. The medium is part
of it, I am used to students who can sketch a simple TM in a few seconds
on a whiteboard during a tutorial.

>>> There's a simulator here to help things along.
>>> https://turingmachinesimulator.com/
>> and the slightly clunky one he's posted before.
>> I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
>> almost total lack of intellectual curiosity. When supervising PhD
>> students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
>> they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
>> related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.
>> No such worry with PO! 17 years in and he has not even read Linz's
>> proper proof. Never read the busy-beaver proof. Chaitin's alternative
>> take on this topic? Nope, nothing! As for related problems like Post's
>> correspondence problem, the word problem for groups, ambiguous CFGs, all
>> gloriously (and proudly) known to him.
>
> "gloriously /unknown/ to him" :)

Yup!

--
Ben.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]

<jpidnc1Fg9UCfdD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29488&group=comp.theory#29488

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:49:03 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:49:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ][ H is correct ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87y20iguq6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Ad-dnXUjt5cmLND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<e8275782-f862-481b-b96b-5e71f2fe3274n@googlegroups.com>
<u5idnZh-y_1BW9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<c2109ffa-35f7-4a0c-8472-89e8d22294a6n@googlegroups.com>
<jrWdnf8nHNMtT9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<19b17d44-30c6-41df-b83c-eb3ed6b50952n@googlegroups.com>
<1OqdnShoiPH0S9D_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6af1c7ca-19f1-45e4-91ba-a5aa25f271bdn@googlegroups.com>
<LIKdnZFFlsltRtD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<fb84785d-5d77-4482-9974-eaa4f4e86483n@googlegroups.com>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <fb84785d-5d77-4482-9974-eaa4f4e86483n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <jpidnc1Fg9UCfdD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 117
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-71k24pEWDOSo3pclcjqTJKblkRje7Tg9yDeLFbge1nrDoQTx3mBrWQVWXUOeU4zevO9FKg7FCQE+9F8!EOt1+3YGkz1Oej1EiqhGz01mMxQqxTV+unlbU+dRUEqjcmxX9a/OefDLKkEu9g44Ps4RfwfgYgVP!rw==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 8051
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:49 UTC

On 4/6/2022 1:34 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:29:11 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/6/2022 1:18 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 2:05:36 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/6/2022 12:55 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 1:49:43 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 12:07 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 12:59:15 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 11:43 AM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 11:29:06 AM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/6/2022 9:19 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Andy Walker <a...@cuboid.co.uk> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 06/04/2022 02:57, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> [I wrote:]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I was thinking of real, skilled, programmers trying to do
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the manifestly impossible. I have in mind one of our [successful!] MSc
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> students who visited two or three years later: [...].
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What used to be called a "conversion MSc"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, and no. We didn't think of it that way, as we treated CS
>>>>>>>>>>>> as just another branch of maths -- all of our students did some, just
>>>>>>>>>>>> as they all did some statistics, and quite a lot chose to do CS options
>>>>>>>>>>>> in the third year. From that PoV, it was a continuation rather than a
>>>>>>>>>>>> conversion MSc, offering more advanced CS [and statistics, ...] than
>>>>>>>>>>>> had been in the BSc. But it could have been a conversion for students
>>>>>>>>>>>> coming with [maths] BScs from other places.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ours was more genuinely conversion as we took students with, in theory,
>>>>>>>>>>> any background at all -- philosophy, English, history, whatever. In
>>>>>>>>>>> general those with maths, physics and EE backgrounds has fewer problems,
>>>>>>>>>>> but the MSc (in contrast to the BSc) was deliberately designed to have
>>>>>>>>>>> less theory in it.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Instead, you're having to deal with his apparent [but he may just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be trolling] difficulties in understanding what you want. I wonder how he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would get on with similar exercises in C, [...].
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right. I think TMs may be a step too far. I don't think I'll get even
>>>>>>>>>>>>> one TM accurately specified, let alone written.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You [and others] know this, yet persist! I suppose there is
>>>>>>>>>>>> some interest in knowing what the next wriggle will be?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I just wonder when he'll stop the "tutorial".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As for the main mistake, I know enough about cranks to aim for only one
>>>>>>>>>>> of two things: can they be persuaded to say enough to show others that
>>>>>>>>>>> they are wrong (for example PO admission that H(P,P) == false is correct
>>>>>>>>>>> despite the fact that P(P) halts),
>>>>>>>>>> If it is the case that the simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then H correctly
>>>>>>>>>> maps this finite string input to its reject state and nothing in the
>>>>>>>>>> universe can correctly contradict that H is correct.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you have a white dog in your living room and everyone in the universe
>>>>>>>>>> disagrees, you still have a white dog in your living room.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What you've actually shown is that for any simulating halt decider H, H^ built from it, and input <H^><H^> which represents H^ applied to <H^>, no H can simulate H^ applied to <H^> to its final state. This says nothing of whether H^ applied to <H^> halts, which is the actual question *as stated in the Linz proof*.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If it is the case that the
>>>>>>>> CORRECTLY
>>>>>>>>>> simulated input to H cannot possibly reach
>>>>>>>>>> its own final state under any condition what-so-ever then
>>>>>>>> computation that halts … the Turing machine will halt whenever it enters
>>>>>>>> a final state. (Linz:1990:234) cannot possibly be met therefore
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The *turing machine*, not an inaccurate simulation. The measurement of correct is what H^ applied to <H^> does.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ specifies a different sequence of configurations than
>>>>>> the simulation of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ by embedded_H.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you're answering the wrong question. The question being asked is "Does H^ applied to <H^> halt?",
>>>> No that is not the freaking question you freaking nitwit.
>>>>
>>>> The question is: Does the input specify a sequence of configurations
>>>> that would reach their own final state?
>>>
>>> FALSE. From Linz:
>>>
>> Linz is wrong too.
>
>
> Nope. The above is a stipulative definition.
>
> It is incorrect to disagree with stipulative definitions.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipulative_definition
>
> Disagreeing with a stipulative definition is like disagreeing with
> arithmetic.
>
> When in BASIC we say let X = 5,
> disagreeing that X has the value of 5 is incorrect.
>
>> Because we know that a halt decider must compute the mapping
>>
>> FROM ITS INPUTS
>> FROM ITS INPUTS
>> FROM ITS INPUTS
>> FROM ITS INPUTS
>>
>> Anyone that says it must compute the mapping from non-inputs such as Ĥ
>> applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ IS FREAKING WRONG !!!
>
> You're wrong because you're disagreeing with a stipulative definition.

When a textbook disagrees with fundamental principles of computer
science the textbook loses.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<87bkxegi88.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29489&group=comp.theory#29489

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben Bacarisse)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 19:49:27 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <87bkxegi88.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee2d88a6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<w_WdndouypjXZtf_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tub87tkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<lMednU9oMbfWidb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilro7r87.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<xtmdnZF-EMLqgdb_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<877d847hkd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<UeadnWsKI5oqzNb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87r16c5tm0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<4dSdnWjHVszE4tb_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87lewk5otp.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<leidnWIfpu2XBtb_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k3761bq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<yLWdnZ05dv-m6tH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0c33rk3.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<9OCdnd0y-MtNatH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87o81e3mso.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<eI6dnePeWI_8jdD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d822zfj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t7SdnX_CbaqAM9D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="868cbdde2d6be9fafaea86462d662626";
logging-data="21618"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/Qy9pAR5rMClxc2QlbAyPIvbsu42qr2DQ="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/+IXWYpoDQP2ETlGDmoHIhyNW14=
sha1:VpkVHrHljPrngtNFdC/fq+Cjuu4=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.d11c607b1b74585285aa.20220406194927BST.87bkxegi88.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben Bacarisse - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:49 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

>> I thought you wanted to learn how TMs are
>> specified so you had the knowledge to read and understand Linz's
>> specifications.
>
> Not at all. I already understand this better than you do.

Ah, let's call it a day then.

You can go back to ignoring these apparently unanswerable questions:

What string must be passed to H so that H can tell us whether or not Ĥ
applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts?

Given that Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊦* Ĥ.qx ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊦* Ĥ.qn what state does H.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩
transition to?

I'd say it's shocking that you can't answer these after 17 ears of
study, but the truth is you know the answers and you know they prove you
wrong. Your plan is to avoid answering until you can find some way to
convenience at least one other person on the plant that the wrong answer
is the right one.

--
Ben.

Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [ key missing piece in dialogue ]

<fJKdnTnPVsBOfND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=29490&group=comp.theory#29490

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 13:54:11 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 13:54:10 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(10) [
key missing piece in dialogue ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v6idnaCJifSVTtT_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87sfquc7ns.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <VMSdneUyrJVin9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qydde5e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <w-edndUxIuQ1h9f_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<w-edndQxIuTUhtf_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilrpbwrt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<n72dnae_RMuWrdf_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <877d85buic.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2eghp$5n3$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8735it7zaj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2hsgu$mmd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <878rsj3rdn.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t2k1bu$1srt$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<9d73989d-896c-420c-a5b4-c53ffc39f4b4n@googlegroups.com>
<87sfqqgu9t.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t2kgjs$1v70$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<87h776gipq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87h776gipq.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <fJKdnTnPVsBOfND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 87
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-MuIGrbLaF11+ZhWhudyslV8eGTtuLv1DFyw3DHOc8yKOzOXvY2Zfgap8I4uyLcVQkA7fPtQYpcY5kw4!+e8xrj9zfv4drmPl6EISLYZvKjzkHbs632n0nrK9iudWunc89PI/cbTsIwW78BPipX8HDAng/s+2!Rw==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5713
 by: olcott - Wed, 6 Apr 2022 18:54 UTC

On 4/6/2022 1:38 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> writes:
>
>> On 06/04/2022 15:29, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> It's obvious that PO has never specified a Turing machine, or else he would
>>>> just dash off a machine to decide the even numbers.
>>>> But he knows what a Turing machine is, and he understands the quintuple
>>>> notation. So I think that with a bit of effort, he's capable of
>>>> writing such a machine.
>>> You'd think so. I wonder what the problem is. It can't be fear of
>>> getting it wrong because he can exhaustively test it using things like:
>>
>> I think he simply doesn't see the point in wasting his time on it.
>>
>> Is PO cooperating in this learning exercise because he understands
>> that he doesn't know enough about TMs to make arguments about them?
>> Or that he is intellectually curious about them and wants to
>> understand the fundamentals better?
>>
>> I don't think anything like that applies - PO believes that his claims
>> are correct, and that other people don't agree /because of the
>> language he is using/ to express the claims. He believes that by
>> cooperating with you, he might learn the Right Way to express his
>> claims, then you and everybody else will understand him and agree he
>> is correct. I.e. he wants to "learn the right words to say" rather
>> than "learn the fundamental concepts involved".
>
> Sure. He's said that quite explicitly.
>
>> PO probably realises that constructing an actual TM will not give him
>> any "handy new words" that will convince anyone that his claims are
>> correct - and he's quite right in that respect. So why waste time on
>> it? (Purely from /his/ perspective.) I suppose he might do it if he
>> thought he would learn the Right Words in lesson 2, and that you
>> wouldn't give him lesson 2 unless he writes the TM you want in lesson
>> 1...
>
> That's the plan. I want an actual fully encoded TM as example to set
> exercises about specifying TM's that (informally) decide things about
> TMs and TM computations.
>
> But I admit I am used to this going so much faster. The medium is part
> of it, I am used to students who can sketch a simple TM in a few seconds
> on a whiteboard during a tutorial.
>

Unless this also makes progress towards a mutual understanding of all of
the details of this:

Does the input specify a sequence of configurations that would reach
their own final state?

It is pointless.

I did get the TM interpreter to compile this morning. That could have
been the potentially most time consuming step.

This is my 8th day after chemo and I still feel pretty good.

>>>> There's a simulator here to help things along.
>>>> https://turingmachinesimulator.com/
>>> and the slightly clunky one he's posted before.
>>> I think it might relate to one of my pet peeves about cranks -- the
>>> almost total lack of intellectual curiosity. When supervising PhD
>>> students, one often has to keep that rained-in (after the first year) or
>>> they would spend all of their time learning and investigating issues
>>> related to their thesis topic, rather than focusing on that one thing.
>>> No such worry with PO! 17 years in and he has not even read Linz's
>>> proper proof. Never read the busy-beaver proof. Chaitin's alternative
>>> take on this topic? Nope, nothing! As for related problems like Post's
>>> correspondence problem, the word problem for groups, ambiguous CFGs, all
>>> gloriously (and proudly) known to him.
>>
>> "gloriously /unknown/ to him" :)
>
> Yup!
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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

Pages:12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor