• Concise refutation of halting problem proofs V26 [ defined sets ]

    From olcott@21:1/5 to All on Mon Nov 22 13:29:24 2021
    XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, sci.logic

    #include <stdint.h>
    #include <stdio.h>
    typedef int (*ptr)();

    int H(ptr x, ptr y)
    {
    x(y); // direct execution of P(P)
    return 1;
    }

    // Minimal essence of Linz(1990) Ĥ
    // and Strachey(1965) P
    int P(ptr x)
    {
    H(x, x);
    return 1; // Give P a last instruction at the "c" level
    }

    int main(void)
    {
    H(P, P);
    }

    Computation that halts
    a computation is said to halt whenever it enters a final state.
    (Linz:1990:234)

    [PSR_set] Combinations of H/P having pathological self-reference
    Every H of H(P,P) invoked from main() where P(P) calls this same H(P,P)
    and H simulates or executes its input and aborts or does not abort its
    input P never reaches its last instruction.
    ∀H ∊ PSR_set ∀P ∊ PSR_set (Input_Never_Halts(H(P,P)))

    [PSR_subset] Because we know that the input to H(P,P) never halts for
    the whole PSR_set and a subset of these H/P combinations aborts the
    execution or simulation of its input then we know that for this entire
    PSR subset the input to H(P,P) never halts and H(P,P) halts.
    PSR_Subset ⊆ PSR_set ∀H ∊ PSR_Subset (Halts(H(P,P)))

    [PSR_subset + P(P)_set] Appending the computation int main(void) { P(P);
    } to the PSR_subset we derive another set having the exact same H/P
    pairs. In this set the input to H(P,P) never halts and P(P) halts. This
    proves that no contradiction is formed.
    ∃H ∊ [PSR_subset + P(P)_set] ∃P ∊ [PSR_subset + P(P)_set] ((Input_Never_Halts(H(P,P))) ∧ Halts(P(P)))

    [Decidable_PSR_subset] The subset of the PSR_subset where H returns 0 on
    the basis that H correctly detects that P specifies infinite recursion
    defines the decidable domain of function H.

    H is a computable function that accepts or rejects inputs in its domain
    on the basis that these inputs specify a sequence of configurations that
    reach their final state.
    H is a correct decider and H has a correct halt deciding basis.

    The above H could detect that its simulated P is calling H(P,P) with the
    same parameters that it was called with, thus specifying infinite
    recursion.

    See Page 3 of:
    Halting problem undecidability and infinitely nested simulation V2

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356105750_Halting_problem_undecidability_and_infinitely_nested_simulation_V2)




    --
    Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott

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

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)