XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/13/2025 2:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/13/25 3:19 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/13/2025 1:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 12/11/25 8:48 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> Turing machine deciders compute functions from finite   
   >>>> strings to {accept, reject}.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The halting problem itself requires that deciders   
   >>>> compute the behavior of executing machines, thus   
   >>>> category error flat out and simple.   
   >>>   
   >>> Why do you say that?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> All of the textbooks require halt deciders to   
   >> report on the behavior of machine M on input w.   
   >>   
   >> Since no Turing machine ever takes any Machine   
   >> M as an input this  a category error even   
   >> when this make no difference.   
   >   
   > Which just shows you don't understand the concept of representation.   
   >   
      
   So when you cut your face we can fix this by   
   putting a piece of tape on the picture of   
   your face?   
      
   It is that I do understand that a representation   
   of a thing is never exactly one-and-the-same as   
   that thing itself.   
      
   They simply glossed over the key detail because   
   they thought that it made not difference.   
      
   The perfectly accurate way of defining a halt   
   decider is   
      
   Turing machine halt deciders compute the mapping   
   from input finite strings to an {accept, reject}   
   value on the basis of the behavior that this   
   input finite string specifies.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott

   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make 
   
   "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
   
   reliably computable.

   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation
   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)