XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: dbush.mobile@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/22/2025 1:11 PM, olcott wrote:   
   > On 10/22/2025 12:07 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> 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,   
   >   
   > That is stupidly incorrect.   
   > That DD calls HHH(DD) (its own simulator) IS PART OF   
   > THE BEHAVIOR THAT THE INPUT TO HHH(DD) SPECIFIES.   
      
   And the fact that HHH(DD) returns 0 causing DD to subsequently halt is   
   also part of the behavior specified by finite string DD.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)