XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: 643-408-1753@kylheku.com   
      
   On 2025-10-22, olcott  wrote:   
   > On 10/22/2025 10:40 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2025-10-22, olcott  wrote:   
   >>> On 10/20/2025 10:20 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>>> And when I identify a flaw yo simply ignore   
   >>>>> whatever I say.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Nope; all the ways you say claim you've identified a flaw have been   
   >>>> dissected by multiple poeple to a much greater detail than they deserve.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> It is disingenuous to say that you've simply had your details ignored.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Turing machines in general can only compute mappings   
   >>> from their inputs. The halting problem requires computing   
   >>> mappings that in some cases are not provided in the   
   >>> inputs therefore the halting problem is wrong.   
   >>   
   >> The halting problem positively does not propose anything   
   >> like that, which would be gapingly wrong.   
   >   
   > It only seems that way because you are unable to   
      
   No, it doesn't only seem that way. Thanks for playing.   
      
   > provide the actual mapping that the actual input   
   > to HHH(DD) specifies when DD is simulated by HHH   
   > according to the semantics of the C language,   
      
   DD is a "finite string input" which specifies a behavior that is   
   independent of what simulates it, and in what manner.   
      
   When DD is simulated by HHH, the simulation is left incomplete.   
      
   That is not permitted by the semantics of the source   
   or target language in which DD is written;   
   an incomplete simulation is an incorrect simulation.   
      
   Thus, DD being simulated by HHH according to the semantics.  The   
   semantics say that there is a next statement or instruction to execute,   
   which HHH neglects to do.   
      
   Now that would be fine, because HHH's job isn't to evoke the   
   full behavior of DD but only to predict whether it will halt.   
      
   But HHH does that incorrectly; the correct halting status is 1,   
   not 0.   
      
   Thus HHH achieves neither a correct simulation, nor a correct   
   appraisal of the halting status.   
      
   > even though I do remember that you did do this once.   
      
   I must have accidentally written something that looked   
   like crackpottery.   
      
   --   
   TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr   
   Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal   
   Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)