XPost: sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: dbush.mobile@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/26/2025 9:53 AM, olcott wrote:   
   > On 11/25/2025 10:11 PM, Python wrote:   
   >> Le 26/11/2025 à 05:06, olcott a écrit :   
   >>> After you understand what the conventional view   
   >>> really is we might make some progress on this.   
   >>   
   >> The Halting Problem is what it is. It makes perfect senses. You have   
   >> no choice about it.   
   >>   
   >>> Ultimately I am proving that the halting problem   
   >>> itself is incorrect.   
   >>   
   >> A sensible problem cannot be "incorrect".   
   >>   
   >   
   > What seems to be a sensible problem that has   
   > incoherence that no one bothered to notice is   
   > still incorrect because it is incoherent.   
   >   
   > First you must understand this:   
   > *The input to HHH(DD)   
      
   i.e. finite string DD, which is the description of machine DD and   
   therefore stipulated to specify all semantic properties of machine DD,   
   including the fact that it halts when executed directly.   
      
      
   > DOES SPECIFY NON-HALTING BEHAVIOR*   
      
   False, see above.   
      
   >   
   > Then you can understand this:   
   > The halting problem is flat out incorrect when it   
   > requires a halt decider to report on anything   
   > besides what its actual input actually specifies.   
      
   False, see above.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)