XPost: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/13/2025 4:46 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   > olcott kirjoitti 12.12.2025 klo 16.27:   
   >> On 12/12/2025 2:56 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>> olcott kirjoitti 12.12.2025 klo 6.01:   
   >>>> Principle 1: Turing machine deciders compute functions   
   >>>> from finite strings to {accept, reject} according to   
   >>>> whether the input has a syntactic property or specifies   
   >>>> a semantic property.   
   >>>   
   >>>> The halting problem requires that a halt decider   
   >>>> report on the direct execution of a Turing machine,   
   >>>> thus category error.   
   >>>   
   >>> The last thus is false. What clause before it claims is irrelevant to   
   >>> the meaning of the term "category error". Therefore the conclusion is   
   >>> not proven.   
   >>   
   >> The halting problem requires reporting on the behavior   
   >> of an executing Turing machine. Turing machines only   
   >> take finite string inputs and not Turing machine inputs.   
   >> *This is the category error*   
   >>   
   >> Turing machine deciders only report on the behavior   
   >> of Turing machines indirectly through the proxy of   
   >> finite strings. *This key detail has been ignored*   
   >>   
   >> Principle 2: We measure the semantic property that   
   >> the finite string specifies by a UTM-based halt   
   >> decider that simulates its input finite string   
   >> step-by-step and watches the execution trace of   
   >> this behavior.   
   >>   
   >> This eliminates the category error.   
   >   
   > You can't elminate what didn't ever exist. Instead that simply   
   > declares that you are not talking about the halting problem.   
   >   
      
   When you carefully evaluate my reasoning you   
   will see that no decider can possibly report   
   on anything that is not directly encoded in   
   its finite string input input according to   
   the semantics of its encoding language.   
      
   That this is a much more difficult analysis   
   than hardly anyone every bothers to evaluate   
   does not mean that it is not fully grounded in   
   standard definitions of the Turing machine   
   model of computation.   
      
   All Turing machines only compute the mapping   
   from an input finite string to some value.   
      
   It is very difficult to see that the halting   
   problem definition breaks that rule.   
      
      
   --   
   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)