XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: dbush.mobile@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/23/2025 2:55 PM, olcott wrote:   
   > On 10/23/2025 1:48 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >> On 10/23/2025 2:40 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>> On 10/23/2025 1:31 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>> On 10/23/2025 2:17 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>> On 10/23/2025 1:09 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 10/23/2025 2:06 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 1:00 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 1:58 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 12:03 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 12:49 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 10:48 AM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/23/2025 4:15 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-22 12:35:14 +0000, olcott said:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/22/2025 4:07 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-21 15:04:58 +0000, olcott said:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/21/2025 3:45 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-20 16:17:07 +0000, olcott said:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 3:42 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-19 16:21:42 +0000, olcott said:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/19/2025 4:24 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-18 13:16:50 +0000, olcott said:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/18/2025 7:16 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please think this all the way through without   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making any guesses   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simulating Termination Analyzer HHH correctly   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulates its input until:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) Detects a non-terminating behavior pattern:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abort simulation and return 0.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Simulated input reaches its simulated   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "return" statement: return 1.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (c) If HHH must abort its simulation to prevent   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its own non- termination   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      then HHH is correct to abort this   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation and return 0.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int DD()   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   if (Halt_Status)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     HERE: goto HERE;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   return Halt_Status;   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   HHH(DD);   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What value should HHH(DD) correctly return?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When the halting problem requires a halt decider   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to report   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on anything besides the behavior that its input   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifies this is just like requiring a silk   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purse be made   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from a sow's ear.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The way halting problem is usally presented the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input to the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem is a Truing machine   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The input to the problem is never ever a Turing   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine it is always a finite string generally   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assumed to be a machine description.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The input to the problem as usually presented is a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pair of a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Turing machine and an input to it.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wrong again. It is always a finite string Turing Machine   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description and never an actual Turing machine.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As the problem is presented in Wikipedia the input to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the proble   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a program and an input to it. Both can be regareded   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as finite   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strings.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The behavior of the caller of HHH(DD) is not encoded in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its input.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH has no way to tell who its caller is.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is what makes the halting problem a category error.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it does not. Nothing in the problem statement "Present   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a method   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to determine whether a given program halts or runs   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> forwever when   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> started with a given input to that program" says that the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> behaviour   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the caller of HHH(DD) is not encoded to in the input to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It merely requires that the required method produces the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> answer for any program and any input.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure and equally the pure mental object of a Turing   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> machine is limited in this same sort of way that it   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot bake a birthday cake.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> from their finite string inputs to an accept state   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> or reject state on the basis that this input finite   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> string specifies a semantic or syntactic property.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> And you agreed that this means they are allowed to report on   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> the halt status of the machine described by the input:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/20/2025 11:51 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  > On 10/20/2025 10:45 PM, dbush wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  >> And it is a semantic tautology that a finite string   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> description of a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  >> Turing machine is stipulated to specify all semantic   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> properties of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  >> described machine, including whether it halts when   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> executed directly.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  >   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>  > Yes that is all correct   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> That is all a correct statement of the false   
   >>>>>>>>>>> assumption that derives the category error.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping   
   >>>>>>>>>>> from their finite string inputs to an accept state   
   >>>>>>>>>>> or reject state on the basis that this input finite   
   >>>>>>>>>>> string specifies a semantic or syntactic property.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)