Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  nodelist  faq  login

Unix will self-destruct in five seconds... 4... 3... 2... 1...


computers / comp.ai.philosophy / Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]

SubjectAuthor
* Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [olcott
+* Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [olcott
|`* Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [olcott
| `- Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [olcott
`- Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [olcott

1
Subject: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 21:57 UTC
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: Tue, 05 Apr 2022 16:57:39 -0500
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 16:57:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
Content-Language: en-US
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Subject: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [
Everyone's Mistake ]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Zfmdnc5TnpTOJtH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 30
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-rfg7pDffTCgJQHMv200i8kkthAz+9Ty0LtksAbXafE72tBcqr7DUrh99bakoMEONPAqIWGup26OPAFD!sUJ3CydREfZ+rzEZO41tz1HOJ/9ZVJMPgwo0X6JwuRu9MBrwk8KeXheLWnspfKgsjOtkfP5h6yPh!6Q==
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: 2161
View all headers
When the last sentence of the following is fully understood it will be known that I am correct:

WE ALL AGREE ON THIS:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings to its own accept or reject state.

HERE IS WHERE WE DIVERGE:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings to its own accept or reject state:

On the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input.

THIS IS EVERYONE'S MISTAKE
All of my reviewers (and Linz) always measure a different sequence of configurations than the one that is actually specified by the actual input.



Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation (V4)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359349179_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V4 --
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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


Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 02:25 UTC
References: 1 2
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2022 21:25:43 -0500
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 21:25:41 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [
Everyone's Mistake ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <Zfmdnc5TnpTOJtH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<8735ir3r8i.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <8735ir3r8i.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <zZCdnaXGX4i6Z9H_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 38
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-U6NeUAeW57HqSQxum8uxXbX3U3Qk+3sdHTBe8YYUGADCeim7OOkn7PN329w9t82bAgnpT1rtbewylA/!JPWxuWSgUJ7yr295DJ+xsMmKh4WIbDZNzYgDQF8VuQPdYUwggksbiqF8ipGGsiweu1+lsh5OV3yz!SQ==
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: 2672
View all headers
On 4/5/2022 9:01 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

When the last sentence of the following is fully understood it will be
known that I am correct:

WE ALL AGREE ON THIS:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state.

HERE IS WHERE WE DIVERGE:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state:

On the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input.

THIS IS EVERYONE'S MISTAKE
All of my reviewers (and Linz) always measure a different sequence of
configurations than the one that is actually specified by the actual
input.

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


Do you understand that different sequences of configurations may have different halting behavior from each other?

When one sequence of configurations seems intuitively identical to another sequence then computer science says that their behavior must be the same UNLESS INTUITION IS WRONG AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT SEQUENCES.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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


Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 14:54 UTC
References: 1 2
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 09:54:28 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:54:27 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [
Everyone's Mistake ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <Zfmdnc5TnpTOJtH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<t2jjpd$4hc$1@dont-email.me>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t2jjpd$4hc$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <xJudnQGH2LQ5NND_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 45
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-5eWTNwqZBFz0RlpUHliCRWyCxZOa9yqWaCQU1M8t1yLqIoFOQjkmqrfm+Ep8LlEADhvefAbXVbPL0gf!t7KPnYvKkBk3uGaju160yoLzGUGZFfyGa1zpg84i+9yk/5Fu+0pYdc20yOqkrJvS7K6bsfsRLYo+!PQ==
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: 3014
View all headers
On 4/6/2022 3:42 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2022-04-05 21:57:37 +0000, olcott said:

When the last sentence of the following is fully understood it will be known that I am correct:

WE ALL AGREE ON THIS:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings to its own accept or reject state.

This tells that a halt decider must be a decider but does not tell
how a halt decider differs from any other decider.

HERE IS WHERE WE DIVERGE:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings to its own accept or reject state:

On the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input.

The last line is too vague, and there is no point in an agreement about
words without an agreement about the meaning of those words.
In particular, the word "specified" does not specify what interpretation
of the input gives the "specified" behaviour.

THIS IS EVERYONE'S MISTAKE
All of my reviewers (and Linz) always measure a different sequence of configurations than the one that is actually specified by the actual input.

No, it is not a mistake. The exact meaning of "specified" is left vague.
Therefore there can be different correct interpretations.

Mikko


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

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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


Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 14:57 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 09:57:52 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 09:57:52 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [
Everyone's Mistake ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <Zfmdnc5TnpTOJtH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<8735ir3r8i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <zZCdnaXGX4i6Z9H_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilrm3mk4.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <5ICdnU3x0aO7j9D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czhu2zn6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Followup-To: comp.theory
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87czhu2zn6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <xJudnQCH2LTtN9D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 66
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-F59fuQ8plHyJnM4I8UUX51KLUh5FbxSd5UY3UsTVof3z3SOVrUiCX6RtUaEtRIyk0mi4gbQrwd6XFzP!H5rod1sFrAJrAVL3YCTuqLZVKnKc2Sv6MEGkQMtfXaTkjQ9odt64sty8r+XZNIwJRpVHqP1BqY+G!IA==
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: 3835
View all headers
On 4/6/2022 6:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/5/2022 10:42 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/5/2022 9:01 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

When the last sentence of the following is fully understood it will be
known that I am correct:

WE ALL AGREE ON THIS:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state.

HERE IS WHERE WE DIVERGE:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state:

On the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input.

THIS IS EVERYONE'S MISTAKE
All of my reviewers (and Linz) always measure a different sequence of
configurations than the one that is actually specified by the actual
input.
What string must be passed to H so that H can tell us whether or not Ĥ
applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts?

Do you understand that different sequences of configurations may have
different halting behavior from each other?
No an answer.

Prerequisite order is required.

What do I need to order?

When one sequence of configurations seems intuitively identical to
another sequence then computer science says that their behavior must
be the same UNLESS INTUITION IS WRONG AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT
SEQUENCES.
Your opinion is noted.

It is an objectively verifiable fact, not a mere opinion.

Then there is no reason for you fear answering these two basic but key
questions:

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

You cannot possibly understand my answer to that question until after you first understand this:

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



--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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


Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [ Everyone's Mistake ]
From: olcott
Newsgroups: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.logic, sci.math
Followup: comp.theory
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 00:07 UTC
References: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 19:07:39 -0500
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2022 19:07:38 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.7.0
Subject: Re: Refuting the Peter Linz Halting Problem Proof --- Version(11) [
Everyone's Mistake ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.math
References: <Zfmdnc5TnpTOJtH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<8735ir3r8i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <zZCdnaXGX4i6Z9H_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87ilrm3mk4.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <5ICdnU3x0aO7j9D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87czhu2zn6.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <xJudnQCH2LTtN9D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<875ynlhpk8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <5NCdnXQbkbOwjdP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<877d81g4rd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
Followup-To: comp.theory
In-Reply-To: <877d81g4rd.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <E8OdnQtKTpTWttP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 97
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-vlgnjRMqiRkl96VMeCLAgZd9ikB7qO9pmlfaBy3kPoSyyjhq6anMmRl7YeQA/32zlrKm43efaW7WLW9!HvzZ1nnxl7xIHuRs8UovZYRFMtVLOxvn2uXCfV+ZaxsbNsbnhvBUIIhr5eONmlZPPvYSrIikva+9!tA==
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: 5507
View all headers
On 4/6/2022 6:40 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/6/2022 4:25 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/6/2022 6:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/5/2022 10:42 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

On 4/5/2022 9:01 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

When the last sentence of the following is fully understood it will be
known that I am correct:

WE ALL AGREE ON THIS:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state.

HERE IS WHERE WE DIVERGE:
A halt decider must compute the mapping from its input finite strings
to its own accept or reject state:

On the basis of the actual behavior actually specified by its input.

THIS IS EVERYONE'S MISTAKE
All of my reviewers (and Linz) always measure a different sequence of
configurations than the one that is actually specified by the actual
input.
What string must be passed to H so that H can tell us whether or not Ĥ
applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts?

Do you understand that different sequences of configurations may have
different halting behavior from each other?
No an answer.

Prerequisite order is required.
What do I need to order?

When one sequence of configurations seems intuitively identical to
another sequence then computer science says that their behavior must
be the same UNLESS INTUITION IS WRONG AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT
SEQUENCES.
Your opinion is noted.

It is an objectively verifiable fact, not a mere opinion.
Then there is no reason for you fear answering these two basic but key
questions:
What string must be passed to H so that H can tell us whether or not Ĥ
applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts?

You cannot possibly understand my answer to that question until after
you first understand this:
No, you can't post the answer because you know it will show you are
wrong.
And, seriously, what do you think could make me not understand the
answer?  It's a string.  How complicated it is?  What you mean is that I
can't possibly understand /that your answer is correct/ until I take the
blue pill.

You cannot possibly understand my answer until after you first
understand that because the correctly simulated input to embedded_H
cannot possibly reach it own final state, that embedded_H is
necessarily correct to reject this input and nothing in the whole
universe can possibly correctly refute this.

Thanks.  Keep not saying what string must be passed to H so that H can
tell us whether or not Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩

The string passed to embedded_H that it correctly maps to its final reject state is: ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.

It is the case that the correctly simulated input to embedded_H can never possibly reach its own final state under any condition at all.
Therefore embedded_H is necessarily correct to reject its input.

Maybe you should brush up on modal logic, you don't seem to be able to grasp what {necessarily} means.

◊P ⟷ ¬□¬P;
Possibly(P) ⟷ Not(Necessarily(Not(P)))

□P ⟷ ¬◊¬P;
Necessarily(P) ⟷ Not(Possibly(Not(P)))

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logic


--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

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


1
rocksolid light 0.7.2
clearneti2ptor