On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>> --
>> Daryl McCullough
>> Ithaca, NY
>
> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
> into account.
>
> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
> answer from Jack.

Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
halt status that H returns.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/10/23 7:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>> --
>>> Daryl McCullough
>>> Ithaca, NY
>>
>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>> into account.
>>
>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>> answer from Jack.
>
> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> halt status that H returns.
>

Nope, it just shows your ignorance of the whole problem.

In the counter example, H is give the simple question, does H^ applied
to the description of H^ halt or not. No matter WHO or WHAT You ask,
this will have exactly the same answer, the opposite of what H applied
to the description of H^ applied to the description of H.

The answer to this question is independent of who you ask it to. The
fact that H^ just happens to be built on a copy of H is irreverent.

Remember, H is DEFINED to be a definite program, so has definite behavior.

Note, the FUNDAMENTAL difference between Jack and H, Jack is a
volitional being who can take in new data and come up with new behavior,
while H is a FIXED program that will ALWAYS give the same answer when
asked the same question.

You are just PROVING that you don't understand the definition of the
field you are talking about, including things like what is Truth.

On 10/10/23 7:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>> --
>>> Daryl McCullough
>>> Ithaca, NY
>>
>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>> into account.
>>
>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>> answer from Jack.
>
> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> halt status that H returns.
>

I suppose a second comment is that you don't understand the difference
between the behavior of a volitional being and a program.

I don't know if that means you think people have no volition, and are
stuck doing what they are "programmed" to do, possiblely based on an
inference that because YOU don't seem able to actually put together
intelgent thought, that no one can.

Or is it that you just don't understand the nature of programs, and
think that somehow there is a form of "magic" that might allow a
computer program to break out of the rigid deterministic mold that is
computing?

On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
> > On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
> >> yes/no answer to the following question:
> >> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
> >> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
> >> --
> >> Daryl McCullough
> >> Ithaca, NY
> >
> > All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
> > can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
> > into account.
> >
> > In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
> > the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
> > answer from Jack.
>
> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> halt status that H returns.

Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
question.
If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
answered with yes or no.

On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>> --
>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>
>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>> into account.
>>>
>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>> answer from Jack.
>>
>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>> halt status that H returns.
>
> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
> question.
> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
> answered with yes or no.

So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
What time is it (yes or no)?
In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
> >>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
> >>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
> >>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
> >>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
> >>>> --
> >>>> Daryl McCullough
> >>>> Ithaca, NY
> >>>
> >>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
> >>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
> >>> into account.
> >>>
> >>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
> >>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
> >>> answer from Jack.
> >>
> >> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> >> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> >> halt status that H returns.
> >
> > Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
> > question.
> > If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
> > answered with yes or no.
> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
> What time is it (yes or no)?

It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
"What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.

> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.

Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
HP is called UNDECIDABLE.

On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>
>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>> into account.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>
>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>
>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
>>> question.
>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
>>> answered with yes or no.
>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>
> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>
>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>
> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.

It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
accurately called an incorrect question.

Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
incorrect questions.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/10/23 9:28 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>
>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>> into account.
>>>>
>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>
>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>>> halt status that H returns.
>>
>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar
>> to Jack's
>> question.
>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's
>> question can be
>> answered with yes or no.
>
> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
> What time is it (yes or no)?
> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>

Nope, because it is a FALSE statment that they are "isomophic".

That statement makes the ERROR that "Jack" a volitional being is the
same thing as a non-volitional program.

You are just making a category error.

A program WILL BY DEFINITION either Halt or Not on a given input, thus
there IS a correct answer to the question, will this input halt.

The only way for that to not be a proper question, is for the input
program to not actually BE a program, and for H^ to not be a program
means, by necessity, that H isn't a program, and thys can't be claimed
to be a possible Halt Decider.

You are just showing that you are nothing more than an ignorant liar.

PERIOD.

I guess your problem is tha your can't see the difference between a
volitional being and a non-volitional program, which shows your own
stupidity.

On 10/10/23 9:58 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>>> into account.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>>
>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar
>>>> to Jack's
>>>> question.
>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's
>>>> question can be
>>>> answered with yes or no.
>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>>
>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new
>> question
>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>>
>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>>
>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP.
>> So, the
>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
>
> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
> accurately called an incorrect question.
>
> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
> incorrect questions.
>

Except the question is NOT "Incorrect", the only thing that is
"incorrect" here is your logic.

As I have shown, all you have done is proven that you have shown that
you are a liar. Your hypothectical H can't exist as a program, and your
actual H doesn't do what you claim.

In fact, you yourself have proven that P(P) will halt, as will a correct
simulation of the input to H(P,P), but H give the INCORRECT answer that
it will not.

So, *YOU* have proven that you are a liar when you say you are correct.

YOU are the "Liar Paradox".

On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
> >>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
> >>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
> >>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
> >>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Daryl McCullough
> >>>>>> Ithaca, NY
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
> >>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
> >>>>> into account.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
> >>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
> >>>>> answer from Jack.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> >>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> >>>> halt status that H returns.
> >>>
> >>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
> >>> question.
> >>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
> >>> answered with yes or no.
> >> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
> >> What time is it (yes or no)?
> >
> > It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
> > "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
> >
> >> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
> >
> > Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
> > HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
> accurately called an incorrect question.

IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like to call it
building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is unconstructable?
What does your incorrect question mean?
> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
> incorrect questions.

Yes, why is your question not an incorrect question?

On 10/10/2023 9:41 PM, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>>>> into account.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>>>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
>>>>> question.
>>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
>>>>> answered with yes or no.
>>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>>>
>>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
>>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>>>
>>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>>>
>>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
>>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
>> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
>> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
>> accurately called an incorrect question.
>
> IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like to call it
> building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is unconstructable?
> What does your incorrect question mean?
>

An incorrect yes/no (technically polar) question is any polar question
such that neither "yes" nor "no" is a correct answer.

>> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
>> incorrect questions.
>
> Yes, why is your question not an incorrect question?

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 10:47:33 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 9:41 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
> >>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
> >>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
> >>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
> >>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question..
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
> >>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
> >>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
> >>>>>>> into account.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
> >>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
> >>>>>>> answer from Jack.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
> >>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
> >>>>>> halt status that H returns.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
> >>>>> question.
> >>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
> >>>>> answered with yes or no.
> >>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
> >>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
> >>>
> >>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
> >>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
> >>>
> >>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
> >>>
> >>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
> >>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
> >> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
> >> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
> >> accurately called an incorrect question.
> >
> > IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like to call it
> > building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is unconstructable?
> > What does your incorrect question mean?
> >
> An incorrect yes/no (technically polar) question is any polar question
> such that neither "yes" nor "no" is a correct answer.

So, you just swapped the term, anything else interesting?

> >> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
> >> incorrect questions.
> >
> > Yes, why is your question not an incorrect question?
> --
> Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/10/2023 9:53 PM, wij wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 10:47:33 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 9:41 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the question.
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>>>>>> into account.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>>>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem counter-example
>>>>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of whatever
>>>>>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable, similar to Jack's
>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's question can be
>>>>>>> answered with yes or no.
>>>>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>>>>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the new question
>>>>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>>>>>
>>>>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the HP. So, the
>>>>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
>>>> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
>>>> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
>>>> accurately called an incorrect question.
>>>
>>> IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like to call it
>>> building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is unconstructable?
>>> What does your incorrect question mean?
>>>
>> An incorrect yes/no (technically polar) question is any polar question
>> such that neither "yes" nor "no" is a correct answer.
>
> So, you just swapped the term, anything else interesting?
>

Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
incorrect questions.

>>>
>>> Yes, why is your question not an incorrect question?
>> --
>> Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/10/23 11:32 PM, olcott wrote:

> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
> incorrect questions.
>

But YOU clearly ARE limited by your inability to understand what the
question is.

"Does Program P when given input D halt in finite time?" is ALWAYS a
proper question, as any such program will either Halt in finite time or not.

Your argument of it not being one is just based on your assumption that
your "program H" doesn't actually need to meet the requirements of a
"Program", probably because you just don't understand what you are
talking about because you are too stupid.

On 10/10/2023 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 9:53 PM, wij wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 10:47:33 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/10/2023 9:41 PM, wij wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the
>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>>>>>>> into account.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question changes
>>>>>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the wrong
>>>>>>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem
>>>>>>>>> counter-example
>>>>>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of
>>>>>>>>> whatever
>>>>>>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable,
>>>>>>>> similar to Jack's
>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's
>>>>>>>> question can be
>>>>>>>> answered with yes or no.
>>>>>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>>>>>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the
>>>>>> new question
>>>>>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the
>>>>>> HP. So, the
>>>>>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
>>>>> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about the
>>>>> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
>>>>> accurately called an incorrect question.
>>>>
>>>> IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like to
>>>> call it
>>>> building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is
>>>> unconstructable?
>>>> What does your incorrect question mean?
>>>>
>>> An incorrect yes/no (technically polar) question is any polar question
>>> such that neither "yes" nor "no" is a correct answer.
>>
>> So, you just swapped the term, anything else interesting?
>>
>
> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
> incorrect questions.
>

Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this question?

Because both "yes" and "no" are the wrong answer from Jack then the
question is an incorrect question when posed to Jack.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 10/11/23 9:31 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 9:53 PM, wij wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 10:47:33 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/10/2023 9:41 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:58:27 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:43 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 9:28:52 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 8:14 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 7:40:04 AM UTC+8, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2023 6:23 PM, _ Olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, June 25, 2004 at 6:30:39 PM UTC-5, Daryl
>>>>>>>>>>> McCullough wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> You ask someone (we'll call him "Jack") to give a truthful
>>>>>>>>>>>> yes/no answer to the following question:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Will Jack's answer to this question be no?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jack can't possibly give a correct yes/no answer to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Daryl McCullough
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ithaca, NY
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All linguists know that a question with the exact same words
>>>>>>>>>>> can have an entirely different meaning when context is taken
>>>>>>>>>>> into account.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In the above case the conext of who is asked the question
>>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>> the meaning of the question so that both yes and no are the
>>>>>>>>>>> wrong
>>>>>>>>>>> answer from Jack.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jack's question is isomorphic to the halting problem
>>>>>>>>>> counter-example
>>>>>>>>>> where the input D to a halt decider H does the opposite of
>>>>>>>>>> whatever
>>>>>>>>>> halt status that H returns.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yup. H cannot return yes or no, therefore HP is undecidable,
>>>>>>>>> similar to Jack's
>>>>>>>>> question.
>>>>>>>>> If you say HP is decidable, it would be the same to say Jack's
>>>>>>>>> question can be
>>>>>>>>> answered with yes or no.
>>>>>>>> So Jack's question and the HP are isomorphic to this question:
>>>>>>>> What time is it (yes or no)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is difficult to say 'isomorphic'. The Jack's question or the
>>>>>>> new question
>>>>>>> "What time is it" are ANALOGY, not formalized like the HP is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In that none of them has a correct yes/no answer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Likely that none of them has a proper yes/no answer, same as the
>>>>>>> HP. So, the
>>>>>>> HP is called UNDECIDABLE.
>>>>>> It is deceptive to say that people cannot make up their mind about
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> answer to an incorrect question. What is called "undecidable" is more
>>>>>> accurately called an incorrect question.
>>>>>
>>>>> IMO, the term 'undecidable' is revolutionary. It is fine you like
>>>>> to call it
>>>>> building H an incorrect question, but doesnt' that mean the H is
>>>>> unconstructable?
>>>>> What does your incorrect question mean?
>>>>>
>>>> An incorrect yes/no (technically polar) question is any polar question
>>>> such that neither "yes" nor "no" is a correct answer.
>>>
>>> So, you just swapped the term, anything else interesting?
>>>
>>
>> Computer science is not limited by its inability to correctly answer
>> incorrect questions.
>>
>
> Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this question?
>
> Because both "yes" and "no" are the wrong answer from Jack then the
> question is an incorrect question when posed to Jack.
>

(You didn't give a question, I guess YOU are making more mistakes).

Yes, Asking *JACK* about what *HE* will say can become a contradiction,
and thus an incorrect question.

The Halting Problem Question thou, doesn't ask the Halt Decider about
what it will do, but about what another program will do, and THAT has a
definite answer.

Note, if Jack was a "robot", with a fixed algorithm of what he would
say, then the question "Will Jack say No as hi next answer?" becomes a
VALID question, as it has a difinitive answer.

Note, if Jack IS volitional, then that question doesn't actually have a
correct answer, even when asked of someone other than Jack, until the
point in the future when he does speak, and thus, in many modes of
logic, just isn't a valid question.

The key point is that volitional beings are not "predictable" and thus
questions about their future behavior don't have a correct answer NOW,
while deterministic programs ARE predictable and thus questions about
what they will do in the future was fixed in the past (when the program
was created) and thus questions about them DO have a correct answer even
right now, even if we haven't done the steps needed to determine that
answer (or even if we can't do steps to determine the answer).

The later is a question about KNOWLEDGE, not TRUTH. The TRUE answer
existed the moment the program was created, even if we never actually
know (or even can know) the answer.