Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 58,721 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Richard Damon    |
|    Re: How do halt deciders really work? --    |
|    20 Dec 25 14:19:02    |
   
   XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/20/2025 1:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/20/25 2:22 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/20/2025 12:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 12/20/25 9:54 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/20/2025 8:41 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>> On 12/20/25 8:49 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 12/20/2025 4:07 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 20/12/2025 03:27, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> Deciders: Transform finite strings by finite   
   >>>>>>>> string transformation rules into {Accept, Reject}   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCDTF.pdf   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> As there are no halt deciders they don't work at all.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> The above defines the generic notion of decider.   
   >>>>>> There are deciders.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> But not Halt Deciders.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> When a halt decider is defined to exceed what   
   >>>> generic deciders can do then this definition   
   >>>> is incorrect.   
   >>>   
   >>> But it isn't. A Halt Decider needs to compute a result from the   
   >>> finite string.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Exactly.   
   >>   
   >> Deciders: Transform finite strings by finite string   
   >> transformation rules into {Accept, Reject}.   
   >   
   > So, you are just admitting you are stupid, as you can't keep the terms   
   > straight because you mind is to crooked.   
   >   
   > The behavior of the finite string that represents this Program P, built   
   > on your defined program H is computable, as shown by the fact that   
   > UTM(P) produces the required result of the behavior of running this   
   > program P.   
   >   
      
   I was not as clear as possible:   
   Deciders: Transform finite string inputs by finite   
   string transformation rules into {Accept, Reject}.   
      
   There are no finite string transformation rules   
   that H can apply to its input P that derive the   
   behavior of UTM(P).   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott
|
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca