XPost: sci.math, comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/21/2025 5:35 PM, Python wrote:   
   > Le 22/12/2025 à 00:19, olcott a écrit :   
   >> On 6/12/2024 11:50 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> When we compute the mapping from the input to H(D,D) this   
   >>> must apply a set of finite string transformation rules   
   >>> (specified by the semantics of the x86 language) to this input.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> The above is my first use applying this term to a halt decider.   
   >>   
   >> My first documented use of the term   
   >> "finite string transformation rules"   
   >> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.theory/c/TFXhleKnHmY/m/lqhDVnvUBgAJ   
   >>   
   >> *This is the basis for my unique definition of a generic decider*   
   >>   
   >> Deciders: Transform finite string inputs by finite   
   >> string transformation rules into {Accept, Reject} values.   
   >   
   > So you stated a triviality that does not change a iota to the fact that   
   > the rest of you claims are wrong.   
   >   
   > So what?   
   >   
      
   Deciders: Transform finite string inputs by finite   
   string transformation rules into {Accept, Reject} values.   
      
   The rest of my claims can be deduced from the above   
   first principle and any standard definition of the   
   halting problem.   
      
   It took me 21.5 years to translate my intuitions into   
   this definitional basis. They weren't worth much as   
   mere intuitions.   
      
      
      
   --   
   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)