home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   comp.lang.c      Meh, in C you gotta define EVERYTHING      243,242 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 242,440 of 243,242   
   olcott to Mikko   
   Re: Very simple first principles showing   
   14 Dec 25 18:15:03   
   
   XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, comp.lang.c++   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/14/2025 4:46 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   > On 11/12/2025 16:38, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/11/2025 2:53 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>> olcott kirjoitti 10.12.2025 klo 18.27:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> DD() executed from main() calls HHH(DD) thus is   
   >>>> not one-and-the-same-thing as an argument to HHH.   
   >>>   
   >>> If the last sentence is true then this is not the counter exmaple   
   >>> mentioned in certain proofs of noncomputability of halting and   
   >>> therefore not relevant in that context. The halting problem reuqires   
   >>> that HHH can determine whether the counter example halts. That is,   
   >>> you must be able to replace "???" in   
   >>>   
   >>>    #include  // or your replacement   
   >>>    int main (void)   
   >>>    {   
   >>>      int Halt_Status = HHH(???); // put the correct argument here   
   >>>      printf("HHH says: %s\n", Halt_Status ? "halts" : "does not halt");   
   >>>      return Halt_Status;   
   >>>    }   
   >>>   
   >>> with whatever specifies the behaviour of DD to HHH. If you can't   
   >>> do this then HHH is not a halt decider nor a partial halt decider.   
   >   
   >> When the halting problem requires a halt decider   
   >> to report on the behavior of a Turing machine this   
   >> is always a category error.   
   >   
   > That you don't know what "category error" means does not justify your   
   > claim. Apparently you can't apply definitions.   
   >   
      
   Turing machines only compute functions from finite   
   strings they never compute functions from Turing   
   machines.   
      
   A halt decider can at best compute the behavior of   
   a Turing machine through the proxy of a finite   
   string machine description it never computes it   
   directly from another Turing machine.   
      
   Whenever any textbook says that a halt decider   
   must compute halting for machine M on input w   
   is it wrong. It actually computes halting that   
   this input pair specifies (⟨M⟩, w).   
      
      
   --   
   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)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca