On 2021-11-20 15:12, olcott wrote:
On 11/20/2021 4:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 11/20/21 4:55 PM, olcott wrote:
On 11/20/2021 3:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 11/20/21 12:48 PM, olcott wrote:
On 11/20/2021 10:47 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
On 11/20/2021 4:57 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
Subject:
Re: Concise refutation of halting problem proofs V20 [ Ben
Bacarisse ]
I would appreciate it if you would not use my name in
connection with
your "work". Thank you.
I have finally made it clear that when the input to H(P,P) never >>>>>>>> halts
the fact that (P) halts does not contradict this.
I would appreciate it if you would not use my name in connection >>>>>>> with
your "work". I can't make you, but I trust you have some sense of >>>>>>> propriety. Thank you.
Not in this case. You have only unfairly evaluated my work.
Now is your chance for an accurate review.
No, your 'proof' is still a lie based on using the wrong
definitions of words.
The computation that is the input to H(P,P) WILL halt if H(P,P)
returns the value 0 as long as P is the required computation based
on that H.
FAIL.
Everyone here defines the domain of function H to contain elements
that are only vague ideas.
LIE.
The Domain of a proper Halt decider is PRECISELY defined.
The domain of function H must actually be a set of elements that
each specify a sequence of configurations.
And they do.
Function H maps elements of its domain D to {0,1}
Domain D is comprised of elements that specify a sequence of
configurations.
H maps elements E of D to {0,1} on the basis of whether or not E
reaches its final state.
Except that for the Computation P(P)
This is the exact vague idea that cannot possibly exist in the domain
of H.
The sequence of configurations specified by the x86 machine language
of P is in the domain of H.
Some vague idea about what P(P) is supposed to do cannot possibly be
in the domain of H.
Which 'vague idea'?
A halt decider doesn't decide what P(P) is "supposed" to do. It decides
what it actually *does* do when run directly from main. There's nothing remotely vague about that.
I think you are confusing the term 'domain' with the term 'scope'. When
you call P(P) from within H it is within the scope of H. when you
execute it directly from main it is not within the scope of H. Scope and domain are entirely different things.
And a halt decider describes the behaviour of independent computations,
not of functions called from within the scope of the decider.
André
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 366 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 03:21:24 |
Calls: | 7,812 |
Files: | 12,924 |
Messages: | 5,749,464 |