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 262,783 of 262,912    |
|    olcott to All    |
|    Re: Proof theoretic semantics based halt    |
|    01 Feb 26 18:28:21    |
   
   XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, comp.lang.prolog   
   XPost: sci.lang, comp.software-eng   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/31/2026 11:49 AM, olcott wrote:   
      
   This message has been simplified so that humans   
   can understand. This message replaces all prior   
   messages.   
      
   >   
   > int DD()   
   > {   
   > int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);   
   > if (Halt_Status)   
   > HERE: goto HERE;   
   > return Halt_Status;   
   > }   
   >   
      
   *I am stipulating that*   
   *I am stipulating that*   
   *I am stipulating that*   
      
   > HHH simulates DD step-by-step according to   
   > the semantics of the C programming language.   
   >   
      
   *I am stipulating that*   
   *I am stipulating that*   
   *I am stipulating that*   
      
   > HHH correctly determines that DD does not have a well-founded   
   > justification tree within Proof theoretic semantics.   
   >   
      
   *That semantically entails this*   
   *That semantically entails this*   
   *That semantically entails this*   
      
   > When HHH is construed as a proof theoretic halting prover   
   > HHH detects the pathological-self-reference of its input and   
   > rejects DD as non-well-founded on this basis.   
   >   
   > % This sentence is not true.   
   > ?- LP = not(true(LP)).   
   > LP = not(true(LP)).   
   > ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))).   
   > false.   
   >   
   > The Liar Paradox is formally rejected by Prolog   
   > occurs_check for this same reason.   
   >   
   > occurs_check correctly determines that LP does not   
   > have a well-founded justification tree within Proof   
   > theoretic semantics.   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2026 Olcott
|
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca