home bbs files messages ]

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

   sci.logic      Logic -- math, philosophy & computationa      262,912 messages   

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

   Message 262,492 of 262,912   
   olcott to Mikko   
   Re: The Halting Problem asks for too muc   
   13 Jan 26 08:31:33   
   
   XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/13/2026 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   > On 12/01/2026 16:32, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 1/12/2026 4:47 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>> On 11/01/2026 16:24, Tristan Wibberley wrote:   
   >>>> On 11/01/2026 10:13, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>> On 10/01/2026 17:47, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 1/10/2026 2:23 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>> No, that does not follow. If a required result cannot be derived by   
   >>>>>>> appying a finite string transformation then the it it is   
   >>>>>>> uncomputable.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Right. Outside the scope of computation. Requiring anything   
   >>>>>> outside the scope of computation is an incorrect requirement.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You can't determine whether the required result is computable before   
   >>>>> you have the requirement.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Right, it is /in/ scope for computer science... for the /ology/. Olcott   
   >>>> here uses "computation" to refer to the practice. You give the   
   >>>> requirement to the /ologist/ who correctly decides that it is not for   
   >>>> computation because it is not computable.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> You two so often violently agree; I find it warming to the heart.   
   >>>   
   >>> For pracitcal programming it is useful to know what is known to be   
   >>> uncomputable in order to avoid wasting time in attemlpts to do the   
   >>> impossible.   
   >>   
   >> It f-cking nuts that after more than 2000 years   
   >> people still don't understand that self-contradictory   
   >> expressions: "This sentence is not true" have no   
   >> truth value. A smart high school student should have   
   >> figured this out 2000 years ago.   
   >   
   > Irrelevant. For practical programming that question needn't be answered.   
   >   
      
   The halting problem counter-example input is anchored   
   in the Liar Paradox. Proof Theoretic Semantics rejects   
   those two and Gödel's incompleteness and a bunch more   
   as merely non-well-founded inputs.   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2026 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