Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Support bacteria -- it's the only culture some people have!


devel / comp.theory / Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

SubjectAuthor
* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofsolcott
+* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemMr Flibble
|`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
| +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
| +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Mr Flibble
| |`- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
| `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemMr Flibble
|  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Mr Flibble
|   |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemMr Flibble
|   | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   | | +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemMr Flibble
|   | | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|   | | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   | | | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|   | | | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   | | | | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|   | | | | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   | | | | | +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   | | | | | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|   | | | | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   | | | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   | | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
+- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
+* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
| +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
| `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|   +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
|   `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|    `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|     +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemMr Flibble
|     |`- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemolcott
|     +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Ben
|     |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | | `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   | +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Dennis Bush
|     | |   | |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   | | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mr Flibble
|     | |   | +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]wij
|     | |   | `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   |   `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |    `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   |     `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |      `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   |       `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |        `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   |         `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |          `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   |           +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |           `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]André G. Isaak
|     | |   |            +- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |   |            `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |   `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |    `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |     +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |     |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |     | `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Richard Damon
|     | |     +* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |     |`* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |     | `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |     |  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |     |   `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Ben
|     | |     `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mikko
|     | |      `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |       `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mikko
|     | |        `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     | |         `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mikko
|     | `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mikko
|     |  `* Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]olcott
|     |   `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]Mikko
|     `- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemRichard Damon
+- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)Mikko
`- Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problemwij

Pages:1234
Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32223&group=comp.theory#32223

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 23:54:35 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 96
Message-ID: <87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="5242"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18H/MvhmUm7NVrcKGy/YdpTDexGFyOTheY="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4rFCiyiHEzKhRvQqtxYaQc6r/24=
sha1:b/WxicfFHKtSoBIb9kJNmNv5ERs=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.92744ce997a6536c147e.20220512235435BST.87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 12 May 2022 22:54 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ]
>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can correctly
>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P). H falls at the first
>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function calls.
>>>
>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>
>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
>
> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
> are always passed in C as char* pointers.

No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are aware of
since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.

In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call. What H
should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
as its argument would or would not halt.

Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.

> I am passing strings of machine code as pointers, this is the normal
> correct way to do this.

Maybe you are deliberately misusing the term string in order to draw the
argument way from the main problem: the "inputs" to H don't have a halt
status being simply data. What H should report is the whether calling
the first pointer with the second as its argument would or would not
halt. That's why H(P,P) == false is wrong. P(P) halts.

>> What
>> H(X,Y) must correctly report on is the halting or otherwise of the
>> function call X(Y). Your H does not do the job it is supposed to do.
>>
>
> int sum(int N, int M)
> {
> return (N+M);
> }
>
> It turns out that this requirement is the same as requiring that
> sum(3,4) must report on sum(5,6), thus making the requirement itself
> incorrect.

It does not "turn out" like that. Your new mantra -- that H reports in
the "halt status of its inputs" -- is just waffle to hide the plain fact
that H(P,P) == false is wrong because P(P) halts.

> The correct way of viewing the HP proof (and it is often stated this
> way) is that there exists some inputs such that H cannot correctly
> report their halt status.

That's not the correct view of the proof. That's exactly the incorrect
view that got you into trouble, and gets students into trouble everytime
this material is taught badly. Unfortunately I agree that it's a common
explanation, but that is no excuse. After 18 years you really should
know what the proof is saying.

> That incoherent requirement is based on the false assumption that the
> behavior that the input to H(P,P) specifies is the always that exact
> same behavior as P(P).

At least you accept that H can't do what the world wants it to.
Apparently you H does something no on cares about: determining the "halt
status if its inputs" which you are now crystal clear about is not the
same as the halt status of P(P).

What amazes me is how seriously you've lost track of what matters. Are
you not interested in the fact -- one you appear now to accept -- that
no function D(X,Y) can determine the halting of the function call X(Y)?
After all, as a programmer, you must know that's what you care about.
Even if your delusion is so profound that you are convinced that the
halting problems is about something else, you must see that this "other
halting problem", the one the world cares about is, unfortunately,
undecidable?

Since you are clear that no function can do what the world wants, what
else have you got to say? Can persuade anyone to care about what your H
is actually deciding? Not me.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32225&group=comp.theory#32225

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 23:58:36 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="5242"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19TEnN5B30+JQpyVCChR+1XBYg0jfNAV8Y="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xg8iJdioFybAOySjIYz596aPJRU=
sha1:kukAZAT+h+d8PD7DbkUEp9KPpZA=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.465c2435db7be3dd1476.20220512235836BST.87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Thu, 12 May 2022 22:58 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>
>> H is no longer a halt decider.

<cut various errors>

> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.

You made lots of point. Many of them wrong. I pointed out some of the
errors.

But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<VsgfK.10$SWc6.8@fx44.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32226&group=comp.theory#32226

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx44.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <VsgfK.10$SWc6.8@fx44.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:09:43 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4055
 by: Richard Damon - Thu, 12 May 2022 23:09 UTC

On 5/12/22 4:18 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>
>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>>
>>> it applies to a
>>> simulating halt decider (SHD).
>>>
>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* H.qy
>>> If the correctly simulated input ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ to H would reach its own
>>> final state of ⟨Ĥ.qy⟩ or ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩.
>>
>> This not Linz's Ĥ.  Linz's H leads to a contradiction because of how H
>> and the "hat" construction are defined.  Using a different "hat"
>> construction, and an "adapted" halt criterion, means you are not
>> addressing Linz's (or anyone's) proof.  Why do you think anyone will
>> take any claims about your bogus seriously?
>>
>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* H.qn
>>> If the correctly simulated input ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ to H would never reach its
>>> own final state of ⟨Ĥ.qy⟩ or ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩.
>>
>> A halt decider would have this simple behaviour:
>>
>>    J ⟨M⟩ s ⊢* J.qy  if M applied to s halts, and
>>    J ⟨M⟩ s ⊢* J.qn  if M applied to s does not halt.
>>
>> (I've changed the name because you are abusing H and Ĥ to refer to TMs
>> that do not meet Linz's specifications.)
>>
>> Which, with the correct "hat" construction applied, results in
>>
>>    Ĵ.q0 ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⊢* J ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⊢* J.qy ⊢* oo   if J applied to ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⟨Ĵ⟩
>> halts, and
>>    Ĵ.q0 ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⊢* J ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⊢* J.qn       if J applied to ⟨Ĵ⟩ ⟨Ĵ⟩ does
>> not halt
>>
>> which, as Linz says, is clearly nonsense.  No TM can behave as Ĵ was
>> assumed to behave.
>>
>> I bring this up only for the benefit of anyone who is still interested
>> in how the proof works.  You stopped talking about the halting problem
>> and it's proofs some while ago, having failed to persuade anyone that
>> the wrong answer is the right one.
>>
>>> Linz, Peter 1990. An Introduction to Formal Languages and
>>> Automata. Lexington/Toronto: D. C. Heath and Company. (317-320)
>>
>> Bit of a nerve to cite Linz when you are ignoring his specification and
>> his proof!
>>
>
> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies infinitely
> nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it does not, thus
> my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>

The input to embedded_H only specifies infinitely nested simulations if
H is designed to NEVER abort its simulation of this input, and if this
is true, then H will not return an answer to H <H^> <H^> because it too
will get stuck in the same infinite nested simulation loop.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32230&group=comp.theory#32230

 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: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:21:19 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:21:18 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 58
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-rXsckZKUbBj1kdRm+Dv2kVoUxThnndNJsGhZ3IVvNYqavqagmrOP/MVwtZ5n+KCN5xDe8w82K8/2mwZ!Yn8Wj2qpdQ35/UT6+z6L0/bF9ZIQVv1tjNVpDTyu1DK31IfgwXzS+lUbA7Qu3urusNPO8GXVB0s=
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: 3856
 by: olcott - Thu, 12 May 2022 23:21 UTC

On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ]
>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can correctly
>>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P). H falls at the first
>>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function calls.
>>>>
>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>
>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
>>
>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
>> are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>
> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are aware of
> since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
> gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.
>
> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call. What H
> should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
> as its argument would or would not halt.
>
> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>

Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink

It is objectively incorrect to say that a halt decider must base its
halt decision on anything other than the actual behavior actually
specified by its actual input such as H(P,P) reporting on P(P).

It is also objectively incorrect to assume that actual behavior actually
specified by the actual input to a halt decider will always be identical
to the direct execution of the corresponding computation. This was
previously unknown before my research.

This is where the faulty requirement came from.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<20220513002413.00005029@reddwarf.jmc>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32234&group=comp.theory#32234

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx01.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: flib...@reddwarf.jmc (Mr Flibble)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Message-ID: <20220513002413.00005029@reddwarf.jmc>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Organization: Jupiter Mining Corp
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 52
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 23:24:13 UTC
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 00:24:13 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 3141
 by: Mr Flibble - Thu, 12 May 2022 23:24 UTC

On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:21:18 -0500
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:

> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
> > olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >
> >> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
> >>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
> >>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
> >>>>>> proofs ]
> >>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can
> >>>>> correctly report on the halting of the function call P(P). H
> >>>>> falls at the first hurdle: being able to decide the halting of
> >>>>> specific function calls.
> >>>>
> >>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of
> >>>> its inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
> >>>
> >>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
> >>
> >> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that
> >> strings are always passed in C as char* pointers.
> >
> > No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are
> > aware of since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your
> > key problem: H gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is
> > concerned.
> >
> > In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call.
> > What H should report is the whether calling the first pointer with
> > the second as its argument would or would not halt.
> >
> > Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
> > deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
> > should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
> >
>
> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink

You have a nerve, mate, being a Christian by-the-book (Bible) person
you also hold those negative traits. Christianity is the largest
groupthink of them all.

/Flibble

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32235&group=comp.theory#32235

 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: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:28:37 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:28:36 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 38
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-6RLScSLNNMyX7MRtddNXvu77YIosl8jRmTdPH6LUPFmcQAtV6Q3xE4N9rhu9qMM+RC9QkQ0DqKSejb3!KJiIpdjXLKsw30fs0zMl90mhnyyq7MaBeasiGFgIiiLskB2e35SXrQeS8fMCps/mjaz7H7OUOho=
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: 2992
 by: olcott - Thu, 12 May 2022 23:28 UTC

On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>
>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>
> <cut various errors>
>
>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>
> You made lots of point. Many of them wrong. I pointed out some of the
> errors.
>
> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>

I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.
It requires a decider to base its decision on a non-input thus directly
contradicting the definition of a decider thus making the requirement
itself incorrect.

My H conclusively proves that it does correctly compute the mapping from
its input finite strings to its own reject state on the basis of the
actual behavior specified by these finite strings.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<AvednUld667mBuD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32239&group=comp.theory#32239

 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: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:42:51 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 18:42:49 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220513002413.00005029@reddwarf.jmc>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <20220513002413.00005029@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <AvednUld667mBuD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 71
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-NFqmrJCHzrbfmaSJES1YpxC9qfI7hbe45Xo4Zec26Ajdh0flEMIQ1QIJVr4qduhg4kAYmxYN6CJ5nsK!aaFuYOeBGFULVjJTSIW7Ohna5Rt6Fsv/jH+dkX+XbbXNm4la7jeVK41DnTuy8VG6WYGhZn0JO3k=
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: 4233
 by: olcott - Thu, 12 May 2022 23:42 UTC

On 5/12/2022 6:24 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:21:18 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
>>>>>>>> proofs ]
>>>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can
>>>>>>> correctly report on the halting of the function call P(P). H
>>>>>>> falls at the first hurdle: being able to decide the halting of
>>>>>>> specific function calls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of
>>>>>> its inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
>>>>
>>>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that
>>>> strings are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>>>
>>> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are
>>> aware of since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your
>>> key problem: H gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is
>>> concerned.
>>>
>>> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call.
>>> What H should report is the whether calling the first pointer with
>>> the second as its argument would or would not halt.
>>>
>>> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
>>> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
>>> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>>>
>>
>> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
>> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
>> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink
>
> You have a nerve, mate, being a Christian by-the-book (Bible) person

Not me. I believe that God intentionally put lots of bullshit in the
bible so that people could learn actual spiritual discernment.

> you also hold those negative traits. Christianity is the largest
> groupthink of them all.
>
> /Flibble
>

I am much more ruggedly individualist than anyone else that you have
ever even heard of.

I always hypothesize that everything that anyone has ever told me is
possibly incorrect until after I conclusively prove otherwise.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32246&group=comp.theory#32246

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 01:35:59 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="6820"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19MAevTW1RR0IHgNsxcr/qTUIcsPGMfyIA="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:goD1bNEp54IuJd2Bj60VeUD2iXk=
sha1:eS3RxfQB91oPuaWLQNzI3WYATZ0=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.1da8b87880c66e175d91.20220513013559BST.87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 00:35 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ]
>>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can correctly
>>>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P). H falls at the first
>>>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function calls.
>>>>>
>>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>>
>>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
>>>
>>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
>>> are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are aware of
>> since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
>> gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.
>> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call. What H
>> should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
>> as its argument would or would not halt.
>> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
>> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
>> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>
> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink

Being an ignorant-of-the-subject person, you don't know what you are
talking about.

> It is objectively incorrect to say that a halt decider must base its
> halt decision on anything other than the actual behavior actually
> specified by its actual input such as H(P,P) reporting on P(P).

You have entered the twilight zone. What is objectively correct is
based on the definition of the problem. If there are no "inputs" to H
that specify the call P(P) then H is useless. But at least you accept
that H can't report on P(P) correctly. You used to simply pretend that
the wrong answer was the right one.

I am stunned that you don't see that you can't avoid the problem. What
everyone wants -- a function D(X,Y) to determine if X(Y) would or would
not halt -- is not possible and you are admitting that fact as if it's
of no interest to you. You are wrong about why there is no such D, but
you agree that the problem can't be solved.

> It is also objectively incorrect to assume that actual behavior
> actually specified by the actual input to a halt decider will always
> be identical to the direct execution of the corresponding
> computation.

One way or another, we only care about the useful one. What the "actual
behavior actually specified by the actual input" is of no interest to
us if it does correspond the "direct execution of the corresponding
computation". We want something that tells up about direct function
calls.

> This was previously unknown before my research.

Don't be so pompous! Your new mantra is just a ruse to draw attention
away from the fact that you clearly accept that what everyone else has
been talking about can't be done.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32247&group=comp.theory#32247

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 01:40:20 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="6820"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/5nftnasCXcxS+LicyA1lSa3RxGIrd8C8="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jHsZtgAk2EutuAtrtadQh5ZYmVs=
sha1:vSFBV2lbrGkSmvXm7cd5MYCaDgU=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.61501a37b7c5cf6140cc.20220513014020BST.87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 00:40 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>>
>>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>> <cut various errors>
>>
>>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>> You made lots of point. Many of them wrong. I pointed out some of the
>> errors.
>> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
>> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>
> I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.

It can't be incorrect. It's a definition. And it's based on the most
natural notion: is the sequence of TM configurations finite or not.

> It requires a decider to base its decision on a non-input thus
> directly contradicting the definition of a decider thus making the
> requirement itself incorrect.

No, halting has to be based on the input. The input contains everything
that specifies the sequence of configurations, yet no algorithm exists
that can made the determination from the input alone.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<p1ifK.143$VFd6.110@fx36.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32249&group=comp.theory#32249

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx36.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <p1ifK.143$VFd6.110@fx36.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 20:56:55 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4190
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 00:56 UTC

On 5/12/22 7:28 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>>
>>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>>
>> <cut various errors>
>>
>>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>>
>> You made lots of point.  Many of them wrong.  I pointed out some of the
>> errors.
>>
>> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
>> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>>
>
> I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.
> It requires a decider to base its decision on a non-input thus directly
> contradicting the definition of a decider thus making the requirement
> itself incorrect.

No, you proved that the halting function is not computable, which is
exactly the claim of the Halting Theorem that you are trying to disprove.

That an actual algorithmic H can't correctly handle the problem is
exactly what the Halting Problem is about.

Note, MOST deciders are working on problems that aren't directly stated
by their literal inputs, but by something the input represents, not is.

ANY time a Turing Machine is being asked a problem about math, is one
such case as the tape is a string of symbols, not "numbers". Yes, it is
a representation of the numbers, but it is JUST a representation of the
number, not the number itself.

By your logic, it is impossible to ask a Turing Machine if a "Number" is
even, only if the number of symbols on a tape is even or the string of
symbols on the tape is a representation of an even number.

This is EXACTLY the same as asking if the reprentation on the tape
represents a Halting Computation.

>
> My H conclusively proves that it does correctly compute the mapping from
> its input finite strings to its own reject state on the basis of the
> actual behavior specified by these finite strings.
>

But the mapping isn't that defined by the Halting problem, so it doesn't
say anything about that mapping.

You seem to be thinking of the Halting Problem as an exam question given
by a teacher to their students, a mere theoretical concept to just try
to solve.

You don't understand that the criteria of the Halting Problem has actual
utility, and came about out of basic problems trying to decide if
certain things are "solvable". Changing the critera means you aren't
actually asking the question that needs to be answered, so is a
worthless result.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<a7ifK.7975$zVe6.3110@fx43.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32253&group=comp.theory#32253

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx43.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 68
Message-ID: <a7ifK.7975$zVe6.3110@fx43.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:03:04 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4053
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:03 UTC

On 5/12/22 7:21 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
>>>>>>> proofs ]
>>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can
>>>>>> correctly
>>>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P).  H falls at the
>>>>>> first
>>>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function calls.
>>>>>
>>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>>
>>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers.  They have no halt status.
>>>
>>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
>>> are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>>
>> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are aware of
>> since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
>> gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.
>>
>> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call.  What H
>> should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
>> as its argument would or would not halt.
>>
>> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
>> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
>> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>>
>
> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink
>
> It is objectively incorrect to say that a halt decider must base its
> halt decision on anything other than the actual behavior actually
> specified by its actual input such as H(P,P) reporting on P(P).
>
> It is also objectively incorrect to assume that actual behavior actually
> specified by the actual input to a halt decider will always be identical
> to the direct execution of the corresponding computation. This was
> previously unknown before my research.
>
> This is where the faulty requirement came from.
>
>

So, basicaally you are rejecting the idea that formal logic has rules.

That says that your whole arguement is irrelevant for any field that
says that there are rules that need to be followed.

Thus, you are showing that your proof doesn't actually apply to the
Halting Problem as you have just rejected the foundation that it is
built on.

Good luck getting anyone to publish your paper in anything but the most
esoteric philosophical journal that specializes in logic without rules.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32254&group=comp.theory#32254

 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: Thu, 12 May 2022 20:25:39 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 20:25:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 74
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-fSIbakwQ2UCMxzVyAPfVH+KC2zwCveaz6OUe8sEFi2lLKeN8JDQGNkMfV9pYrrd48Yw0ozXcZ8ZCuUr!1Y29ex/xRM59gqes5BGyPCJZHw39T8rza8xHntSfP/DsRkYN35jK2cZOr+7f2vuhV7c2kAwZ6vs=
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: 4670
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:25 UTC

On 5/12/2022 7:35 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ]
>>>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can correctly
>>>>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P). H falls at the first
>>>>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function calls.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>>>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers. They have no halt status.
>>>>
>>>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
>>>> are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>>> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are aware of
>>> since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
>>> gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.
>>> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call. What H
>>> should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
>>> as its argument would or would not halt.
>>> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
>>> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
>>> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>>
>> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
>> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
>> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink
>
> Being an ignorant-of-the-subject person, you don't know what you are
> talking about.
>
>> It is objectively incorrect to say that a halt decider must base its
>> halt decision on anything other than the actual behavior actually
>> specified by its actual input such as H(P,P) reporting on P(P).
>
> You have entered the twilight zone. What is objectively correct is
> based on the definition of the problem.

All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
foundation of analytical truth.

I examine these things as they fit into the whole grande scheme of the
nature of truth itself.

It turns out that all "undecidable" problems are only "undecidable"
because they have very well hidden incoherence.

Taking a form such as this: Provide a natural number N such that N > 7
and N < 3, the answer must be a natural number.

When the definition of the halting problem directly contradicts the
definition of a computer science decider, then the definition of the
halting problem is proven to be incorrect.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<D7WdnSno4syOKOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32255&group=comp.theory#32255

 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: Thu, 12 May 2022 20:32:03 -0500
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 20:32:01 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <D7WdnSno4syOKOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 62
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-i3psXdtdaYeP7HbKOBAnhbGVuSuGgAk/j2QADzmDpTsv6RPix9tzXUktRYppyyd2JG71wzvp740L6u/!CuDQcq+G85QQKPkgKENKQXHLLsBLkUdPSCk7erRdbH3ATeFwYl+hWEmtYIDW+a0rlm/D0iU0L90=
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: 3896
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:32 UTC

On 5/12/2022 7:40 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>>>
>>>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>>> <cut various errors>
>>>
>>>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>>>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>>>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>>> You made lots of point. Many of them wrong. I pointed out some of the
>>> errors.
>>> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
>>> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>>
>> I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.
>
> It can't be incorrect. It's a definition. And it's based on the most
> natural notion: is the sequence of TM configurations finite or not.

It is an objectively verifiable fact that the sequence of configurations
specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the one specified by
P(P).

When you have two definitions in computer science that directly
contradict each other what do you do? Toss out at least one of them.

>> It requires a decider to base its decision on a non-input thus
>> directly contradicting the definition of a decider thus making the
>> requirement itself incorrect.
>
> No, halting has to be based on the input.

The H(P,P)==0 is correct.

> The input contains everything
> that specifies the sequence of configurations,

It is an objectively verifiable fact that the sequence of configurations
specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the one specified by
P(P).

> yet no algorithm exists
> that can made the determination from the input alone.
>

H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 are both provably correct.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<wHifK.1432$j0D5.114@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32260&group=comp.theory#32260

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!sewer!alphared!news.uzoreto.com!feeder.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!178.20.174.213.MISMATCH!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <wHifK.1432$j0D5.114@fx09.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:41:50 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5699
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:41 UTC

On 5/12/22 9:25 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 7:35 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/11/2022 8:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/11/2022 7:17 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
>>>>>>>>> proofs ]
>>>>>>>> There are no arguments that can be passed to H so that H can
>>>>>>>> correctly
>>>>>>>> report on the halting of the function call P(P).  H falls at the
>>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>> hurdle: being able to decide the halting of specific function
>>>>>>>> calls.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A halt decider must only correctly report on the halt status of its
>>>>>>> inputs. H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 both do that correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The "inputs" to H are two pointers.  They have no halt status.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is such a nutty thing to say when you already know that strings
>>>>> are always passed in C as char* pointers.
>>>> No pair of pointers has a halt status -- a fact I think you are
>>>> aware of
>>>> since you appear to using this silly mantra to hide your key problem: H
>>>> gives the wrong answer as far as everyone but you is concerned.
>>>> In the context of H, what has a halt status is a function call.  What H
>>>> should report is the whether calling the first pointer with the second
>>>> as its argument would or would not halt.
>>>> Your vague language about the "halt status of its inputs" is
>>>> deliberately designed to hide the truth: that H is not doing what it
>>>> should because H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts.
>>>
>>> Being a learned-by-rote by-the-book person anything that goes against
>>> the book must be wrong because the book establishes the conventional
>>> view. This view is generally locked into academia by groupthink.
>>> https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/groupthink
>>
>> Being an ignorant-of-the-subject person, you don't know what you are
>> talking about.
>>
>>> It is objectively incorrect to say that a halt decider must base its
>>> halt decision on anything other than the actual behavior actually
>>> specified by its actual input such as H(P,P) reporting on P(P).
>>
>> You have entered the twilight zone.  What is objectively correct is
>> based on the definition of the problem.
>
> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
> foundation of analytical truth.
>
> I examine these things as they fit into the whole grande scheme of the
> nature of truth itself.
>
> It turns out that all "undecidable" problems are only "undecidable"
> because they have very well hidden incoherence.
>
> Taking a form such as this: Provide a natural number N such that N > 7
> and N < 3, the answer must be a natural number.
>
> When the definition of the halting problem directly contradicts the
> definition of a computer science decider, then the definition of the
> halting problem is proven to be incorrect.
>
>
>

Nope, the problems do NOT state such an impossibility.

For example, machine M appied to inut w WILL Halt or Not, so its Halting
property is a Truth Bearer, and thus, the Definition of the Halting
Problem is NOT "incorrect"

The issue is that no "Computation" can always be able to determine this
property, because we are able to make a machine that can confound any
other machine that is trying to do that determination.

This doesn't make the problem contradictory, just uncomptable.

Only by adding a rule that the only things are provable can be true, do
you run into the contradiction, which is what proves that such a rule is
incorrect, at least in any logic system capable of describing such
computations.

All you have proved is that you don't understand this level of subtlty
in logic, that different fields can work under somewhat different "rules".

Some system, which limit the compexity of what operations you can
perform on statements, can include rules like for a statement to be a
truthbearer, it needs to be provable or refutable. While others, because
they allow for higher order logical operations, lose the ability for
constraints like that.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<CNifK.1433$j0D5.227@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32261&group=comp.theory#32261

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<D7WdnSno4syOKOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <D7WdnSno4syOKOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <CNifK.1433$j0D5.227@fx09.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 21:48:20 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 3734
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 01:48 UTC

On 5/12/22 9:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2022 7:40 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>>>>
>>>>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>>>> <cut various errors>
>>>>
>>>>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>>>>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>>>>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>>>> You made lots of point.  Many of them wrong.  I pointed out some of the
>>>> errors.
>>>> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
>>>> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>>>
>>> I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.
>>
>> It can't be incorrect.  It's a definition.  And it's based on the most
>> natural notion: is the sequence of TM configurations finite or not.
>
> It is an objectively verifiable fact that the sequence of configurations
> specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the one specified by
> P(P).
>
> When you have two definitions in computer science that directly
> contradict each other what do you do? Toss out at least one of them.
>
>>> It requires a decider to base its decision on a non-input thus
>>> directly contradicting the definition of a decider thus making the
>>> requirement itself incorrect.
>>
>> No, halting has to be based on the input.
>
> The H(P,P)==0 is correct.
>
>> The input contains everything
>> that specifies the sequence of configurations,
>
> It is an objectively verifiable fact that the sequence of configurations
> specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the one specified by
> P(P).

Then H is not implementing the Halting Mapping, so is NOT a Halt Decider.

>
>> yet no algorithm exists
>> that can made the determination from the input alone.
>>
>
> H(P,P)==0 and H1(P,P)==1 are both provably correct.
>
>

Only if H and H1 are not Halt Deciders, which has been proven a long
time ago.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32275&group=comp.theory#32275

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:05:11 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="2511"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/3CNfTjBMWPCabIwqC42+C1LpocGXYqs4="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:36SKxBiy4EDycfZyNRiZLGn6QiQ=
sha1:Y8NXx+F6tpwe85En6DjTVIn8z4Q=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.b165c5dc1bf651561551.20220513120511BST.87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 11:05 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
> foundation of analytical truth.

Why have you not had anything published? Everyone here knows why, but
what's your opinion?

You can't publish H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts, but I leave
the rest of you grand claims to others.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<87h75tzjyv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32276&group=comp.theory#32276

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:38:00 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <87h75tzjyv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220511201154.00002147@reddwarf.jmc>
<lYydndd8nf4JzuH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184323.000078f7@reddwarf.jmc>
<YrydnRgeEcs22uD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512184716.00007086@reddwarf.jmc>
<28Odnb4QI9a91OD_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220512190002.00001651@reddwarf.jmc>
<nNSdnRSV0Zck0eD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87bkw24ij5.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<L-ydnag1-YUx9uD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87bkw22w9v.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<14mdnf3FjKW4BeD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ee0y1czv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<D7WdnSno4syOKOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="13934"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+03T3qOsMhj1o9qOBwwLAP28e7rl/Nn7I="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DMr4H4+lygo+e4HZbtgM/7UHMuk=
sha1:JjqbYu0uy76Ioq0zHD1ec1JgCbw=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.3d33b1e69137fa6bc3a2.20220513133800BST.87h75tzjyv.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 12:38 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/12/2022 7:40 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/12/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/12/2022 3:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The halting criteria has been adapted so that
>>>>>>
>>>>>> H is no longer a halt decider.
>>>> <cut various errors>
>>>>
>>>>> My only point is that the input to embedded_H does specifies
>>>>> infinitely nested simulation contradicting Flibble's claim that it
>>>>> does not, thus my H(P,P) is equivalent to embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
>>>> You made lots of point. Many of them wrong. I pointed out some of the
>>>> errors.
>>>> But since you are now unashamedly admitting to using an adapted
>>>> criterion for halting, is there any point in carrying on?
>>>
>>> I proved that the criteria for halting is objectively incorrect.
>> It can't be incorrect. It's a definition. And it's based on the most
>> natural notion: is the sequence of TM configurations finite or not.
>
> It is an objectively verifiable fact that the sequence of
> configurations specified by the input to H(P,P) is not the same as the
> one specified by P(P).

Who cares? Only you. You accept, now, that you can't write a D that
does what everyone but you wants: D(X,Y) == true if and only if X(Y)
halts and false otherwise.

You are done with halting now because you are not making any claims to
have anything to say about what the world calls halting.

> When you have two definitions in computer science that directly
> contradict each other what do you do? Toss out at least one of them.

No. Whatever your H is deciding might be interesting. I don't think
so, but there's no reason to toss it out just because it does not decide
halting.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<t5lksb$qem$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32278&group=comp.theory#32278

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mikko.le...@iki.fi (Mikko)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:02:03 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <t5lksb$qem$1@dont-email.me>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ebc598be787bc900883756e91c0cd6e7";
logging-data="27094"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19w2sJHgbktsKfKIRWbvFFZ"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/uUr23mNAAW9ZCvOPi17JLOeb20=
 by: Mikko - Fri, 13 May 2022 13:02 UTC

On 2022-05-11 18:07:16 +0000, olcott said:

> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
> technical competence in:
> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and x86 code)
> (b) the x86 programming language
> (c) the C programming language and
> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C compilers.

Then it is not a proof. A real proof can be verified by anyone who
knows logic or mathematics.

Mikko

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<t5lleh$vp3$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32279&group=comp.theory#32279

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mikko.le...@iki.fi (Mikko)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:11:46 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <t5lleh$vp3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="db503943dd97ba4f85edda2404ebf225";
logging-data="32547"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/cSZc/uw8ADSKqPS0+LJfd"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0TxUjwtNNAeeCaLszJjxn4KN4fI=
 by: Mikko - Fri, 13 May 2022 13:11 UTC

On 2022-05-13 01:25:37 +0000, olcott said:

> Taking a form such as this: Provide a natural number N such that N > 7
> and N < 3, the answer must be a natural number.

Or a proof that no such natural number exists.

> When the definition of the halting problem directly contradicts the
> definition of a computer science decider, then the definition of the
> halting problem is proven to be incorrect.

The definition of the halting problem cannot contradict the definition
of decider. It can only contradict another definition of halting problem.

Mikko

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<4eSdnWHriPW1GeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32292&group=comp.theory#32292

 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: Fri, 13 May 2022 11:15:36 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 11:15:35 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t5lleh$vp3$1@dont-email.me>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t5lleh$vp3$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4eSdnWHriPW1GeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 43
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-A6iRNpl6MBdrVddbqBKuxt4/1hfdEZ2+3tQ8fAeA8oXy9NFF8bWR+Sh9iSgmm4n2bCVJ28rTj9TsyCH!aPEWFLJd9/v3n7TfzzspCKm3jxpEHGCe9jk+o1PXFbER/phNE4GKHNxymUG8uR7hJHSR/r6O75w=
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: 3060
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 16:15 UTC

On 5/13/2022 8:11 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2022-05-13 01:25:37 +0000, olcott said:
>
>> Taking a form such as this: Provide a natural number N such that N > 7
>> and N < 3, the answer must be a natural number.
>
> Or a proof that no such natural number exists.
>

The answer is restricted to elements of the set of natural numbers hence
making the problem undecidable through Flibble's category error.

My first example of Flibble's category error in 2004 (I didn't call it
that at that time) is the question: What time is it (yes or no)?

>> When the definition of the halting problem directly contradicts the
>> definition of a computer science decider, then the definition of the
>> halting problem is proven to be incorrect.
>
> The definition of the halting problem cannot contradict the definition
> of decider.

Everyone here is requiring a halt decider to break the rule that it only
computes the mapping from its inputs. They insist that the definition of
the halting problem requires a halt decider to compute the mapping from
non inputs.

H(P,P)==0 is correct even though P(P) halts because the correct
simulation of the input to H(P,P) specifies an entirely different
sequence of configurations that the exuecution of P(P).

> It can only contradict another definition of halting problem.
>
> Mikko
>

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<44CdnVMP0pZ3E-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32298&group=comp.theory#32298

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory comp.ai.philosophy sci.logic sci.lang.semantics
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: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:01:30 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:01:29 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.lang.semantics
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <44CdnVMP0pZ3E-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 57
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-dgxreHMgQQXwpXZJ8nHRC9eR+VcOCqTfHhmrvBFZkZQJxC5zU6K1tmgMTnaajWEdJU7osXvzsmRie8L!CIm3d8+D9e/TXMEQVSm7KZfU/R0r+J32LVVArNERQNqT8FTAIH3rZate3kz4/Wyqiv3hst/wfyo=
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: 3892
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 17:01 UTC

On 5/13/2022 6:05 AM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
>> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
>> foundation of analytical truth.
>
> Why have you not had anything published? Everyone here knows why, but
> what's your opinion?
>

I have to conclusively prove my point concretely such the every single
detail of my reasoning can be verified as factually correct before
people will understand that I have corrected errors in some of the
aspects of the basic foundations of logic.

Actual fully operational code refuting the HP proof works best for this
because the Gödel, Tarski, and the LP have hidden semantic gaps that are
defined as non-existent by the conventional terms of their art so they
cannot be seen when using these terms of the art.

The errors in the foundations of logic can be summed up very simply.
Whenever only truth preserving operations are applied to expressions of
language known to be true then a true conclusion is derived.

I also correct the definition of validity:

Validity and Soundness
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be
invalid. https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/

If the Moon is made of green cheese then all dogs are cats is valid and
even though premises and conclusion are semantically unrelated.

Here is my correction to that issue:
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
that its conclusion is a necessary consequence of all of its premises.

The semantically unrelated premises and conclusion is not possible with
syllogisms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism#Basic_structure

Because syllogisms are comprised of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_proposition

> You can't publish H(P,P) == false even though P(P) halts, but I leave
> the rest of you grand claims to others.
>

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32321&group=comp.theory#32321

 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)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 20:06:50 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnVMP0pZ3E-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@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="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="23228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/nj7tmuC/Jj3QbmU6Ys4Zq6ixYnvTY1Eo="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vqRUj7HHbwYPT0xVP8Na2tuTIAo=
sha1:DEyRON5Tan5/r2/7s+otoWnGtN8=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.f58584c507ffbe515d85.20220513200651BST.877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:06 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 6:05 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
>>> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
>>> foundation of analytical truth.
>>
>> Why have you not had anything published? Everyone here knows why, but
>> what's your opinion?
>
> I have to conclusively prove my point concretely such the every single
> detail of my reasoning can be verified as factually correct before
> people will understand that I have corrected errors in some of the
> aspects of the basic foundations of logic.

Hmm.. but it's "dead obvious", isn't it?

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ](V2)

<e83c953c-945c-4ba5-8e1e-df9598b80367n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32330&group=comp.theory#32330

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:d41:b0:45a:87bf:9b77 with SMTP id 1-20020a0562140d4100b0045a87bf9b77mr5897505qvr.44.1652469693258;
Fri, 13 May 2022 12:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a5b:6c1:0:b0:633:b5c7:b9b7 with SMTP id
r1-20020a5b06c1000000b00633b5c7b9b7mr6606457ybq.67.1652469693075; Fri, 13 May
2022 12:21:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweak.nl!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:21:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=124.218.76.41; posting-account=A1PyIwoAAACCahK0CVYFlDZG8JWzz_Go
NNTP-Posting-Host: 124.218.76.41
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e83c953c-945c-4ba5-8e1e-df9598b80367n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem
proofs ](V2)
From: wynii...@gmail.com (wij)
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 19:21:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: wij - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:21 UTC

On Thursday, 12 May 2022 at 02:07:26 UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ refuting the halting problem proofs ]
>
> The x86utm operating system was created so that every detail of the
> conventional halting problem counter example could be fully specified in
> C/x86.
>
> In computability theory, the halting problem is the
> problem of determining, from a description of an
> arbitrary computer program and an input, whether the
> program will finish running, or continue to run forever...
>
> For any program f that might determine if programs halt,
> a "pathological" program g, called with some input, can
> pass its own source and its input to f and then specifically
> do the opposite of what f predicts g will do. No f can exist
> that handles this case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
>
> This exact same relationship of f(g,g) was created as H(P,P), shown below.
>
> This is the overview of the method for proving that this analysis is
> correct:
> (a) Verify that the execution trace of P by H is correct by comparing
> this execution trace to the ax86 source-code of P.
>
> (b) Verify that this execution trace shows that P is stuck in infinitely
> nested simulation (a non-halting behavior).
>
> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
> technical competence in:
> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and x86 code)
> (b) the x86 programming language
> (c) the C programming language and
> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
> compilers.
>
> #include <stdint.h>
> #define u32 uint32_t
>
> void P(u32 x)
> {
> if (H(x, x))
> HERE: goto HERE;
> return;
> }
>
> int main()
> {
> Output("Input_Halts = ", H((u32)P, (u32)P));
> }
>
> _P()
> [00001352](01) 55 push ebp
> [00001353](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
> [00001355](03) 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
> [00001358](01) 50 push eax
> [00001359](03) 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> [0000135c](01) 51 push ecx
> [0000135d](05) e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001362](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
> [00001365](02) 85c0 test eax,eax
> [00001367](02) 7402 jz 0000136b
> [00001369](02) ebfe jmp 00001369
> [0000136b](01) 5d pop ebp
> [0000136c](01) c3 ret
> Size in bytes:(0027) [0000136c]
>
> _main()
> [00001372](01) 55 push ebp
> [00001373](02) 8bec mov ebp,esp
> [00001375](05) 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137a](05) 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> [0000137f](05) e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
> [00001384](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
> [00001387](01) 50 push eax
> [00001388](05) 6823040000 push 00000423 // "Input_Halts = "
> [0000138d](05) e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
> [00001392](03) 83c408 add esp,+08
> [00001395](02) 33c0 xor eax,eax
> [00001397](01) 5d pop ebp
> [00001398](01) c3 ret
> Size in bytes:(0039) [00001398]
>
> machine stack stack machine assembly
> address address data code language
> ======== ======== ======== ========= =============
> ...[00001372][0010229e][00000000] 55 push ebp
> ...[00001373][0010229e][00000000] 8bec mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001375][0010229a][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137a][00102296][00001352] 6852130000 push 00001352 // push P
> ...[0000137f][00102292][00001384] e81efeffff call 000011a2 // call H
>
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:212352
> ...[00001352][0021233e][00212342] 55 push ebp // enter P
> ...[00001353][0021233e][00212342] 8bec mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0021233e][00212342] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0021233a][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
> ...[00001359][0021233a][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][00212336][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
> ...[0000135d][00212332][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> ...[00001352][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 55 push ebp // enter P
> ...[00001353][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8bec mov ebp,esp
> ...[00001355][0025cd66][0025cd6a] 8b4508 mov eax,[ebp+08]
> ...[00001358][0025cd62][00001352] 50 push eax // push P
> ...[00001359][0025cd62][00001352] 8b4d08 mov ecx,[ebp+08]
> ...[0000135c][0025cd5e][00001352] 51 push ecx // push P
> ...[0000135d][0025cd5a][00001362] e840feffff call 000011a2 // call H
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
>
> H sees that P is calling the same function from the same machine address
> with identical parameters, twice in sequence. This is the infinite
> recursion (infinitely nested simulation) non-halting behavior pattern.
>
> ...[00001384][0010229e][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08
> ...[00001387][0010229a][00000000] 50 push eax
> ...[00001388][00102296][00000423] 6823040000 push 00000423 //
> "Input_Halts = "
> ---[0000138d][00102296][00000423] e8e0f0ffff call 00000472 // call Output
> Input_Halts = 0
> ...[00001392][0010229e][00000000] 83c408 add esp,+08
> ...[00001395][0010229e][00000000] 33c0 xor eax,eax
> ...[00001397][001022a2][00100000] 5d pop ebp
> ...[00001398][001022a6][00000004] c3 ret
> Number of Instructions Executed(15892) lines = 237 pages
>
>
> Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V5)
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359984584_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V5
>
>
> --
> Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott
>
> "Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
> Genius hits a target no one else can see."
> Arthur Schopenhauer

According to GUR https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/_tbCYyMox9M
Your POOH is incorrect, totally garbage, nonsense.

Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<fpOdnQv1NvP2LeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32331&group=comp.theory#32331

 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: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:24:27 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:24:26 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <44CdnVMP0pZ3E-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <fpOdnQv1NvP2LeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 35
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-pqBdezOpbeY1Th/cKx0p9YLCEEYaQWheyOid1jUA43WTWJzj7UXZ5lYkflRohk5AvWwDJ0GMzYvPem6!DqgSGQml7gFPBmwm4YOU1D7V4366OS3MaW9bsaSmvTqOXtKZTVGmRWnD4PbokXvMbmpeTskhhBU=
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: 2901
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:24 UTC

On 5/13/2022 2:06 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 6:05 AM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
>>>> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
>>>> foundation of analytical truth.
>>>
>>> Why have you not had anything published? Everyone here knows why, but
>>> what's your opinion?
>>
>> I have to conclusively prove my point concretely such the every single
>> detail of my reasoning can be verified as factually correct before
>> people will understand that I have corrected errors in some of the
>> aspects of the basic foundations of logic.
>
> Hmm.. but it's "dead obvious", isn't it?
>

It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this input
actually specifies.

This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
verifiable facts for this whole six month period.

--
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: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]

<jYyfK.3614$cQO2.590@fx47.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32346&group=comp.theory#32346

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx47.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Proof that H(P,P)==0 is correct [ foundation of truth itself ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <2pSdnR25lqHLZub_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875ymb7gg2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <66idnbnmOdNtyeH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fslf5ze1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <dbudnSEVKLqG7OH_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilqa2wgk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTTLY8HyC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87k0aq1d74.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <HKydnWXX6OcOLuD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87mtflzo9k.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <44CdnVMP0pZ3E-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d6pxned.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <fpOdnQv1NvP2LeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <fpOdnQv1NvP2LeP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <jYyfK.3614$cQO2.590@fx47.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:11:57 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 3548
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 20:11 UTC

On 5/13/22 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 2:06 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/13/2022 6:05 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> All of my studies of Gödel 1931, Tarski 1936, the HP and the Liar
>>>>> Paradox have been concrete proxies for my study of the philosophical
>>>>> foundation of analytical truth.
>>>>
>>>> Why have you not had anything published?  Everyone here knows why, but
>>>> what's your opinion?
>>>
>>> I have to conclusively prove my point concretely such the every single
>>> detail of my reasoning can be verified as factually correct before
>>> people will understand that I have corrected errors in some of the
>>> aspects of the basic foundations of logic.
>>
>> Hmm.. but it's "dead obvious", isn't it?
>>
>
> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
> the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this input
> actually specifies.
>
> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
> people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>

Nope, since BY THE PROBLEM STATEMENT of the Halting Problem, the "actual
behavior" of the input to H applied to <H^> <H^> is DEFINED to be the
behavior of H^ applied to <H^>.

If you claim it means anything else, you aren't working on the Halting
Problem.

If you claim that the Halting Problem can't ask H that question because
of "something", then that is just PROVING the Halting Theorem, as if you
can't even ask the question, then you can't expect there to be an H that
can give the right answer. The mapping being "Not Computatable" is a
valid answer, and just proves the Theorem.

All you have actually proven is that you don't understand the problem
and likely don't even understand how formal logic works.

The fact that you admit that you are changing core foundationally
premises of logic, means you are vastly premature to be talking about
the Halting Problem, you first need to go through and prove the logical
foundations of EVERYTHING it is built on.

GOOD LUCK.

Pages:1234
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor