XPost: sci.logic, sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: polcott2@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/24/2023 4:42 AM, immibis wrote:   
   > On 12/23/23 23:21, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/23/2023 3:06 PM, immibis wrote:   
   >>> On 12/23/23 17:59, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> *This cannot be understood outside of the philosophy of logic*   
   >>>   
   >>> Then don't post it to comp.theory.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> This also equally applies to computability.   
   >> Some of the basic concepts of computability   
   >> have incoherence hard-wired into them.   
   >>   
   >> For example three computer scientists essentially   
   >> agree that the halting problem is essentially   
   >> a self-contradictory (thus incorrect) question.   
   >   
   > Anyone can find three idiots.   
   >   
      
   The halting problem  a self-contradictory thus incorrect question   
   when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.   
      
   When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a   
   different meaning thus is a different question.   
      
   Linguistics understands that the same word-for-word question can   
   have an entirely different meaning based on the linguistic   
   context of who is asked.   
      
   As a concrete example the question:   
   "Are you a little girl?"   
   has different correct answers depending on who is asked.   
      
   H and H1 and D are shown in this source-code   
   https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2023 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: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)