Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 07/05/2025 19:31, olcott wrote:It is unreachable by the Halting Problem counter-exampleOn 5/7/2025 1:14 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:There isn't a terrible mistake in the Halting Problem.On 07/05/2025 18:55, olcott wrote:>When THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION then proof by contradiction fails.>
How do you not get that?
I do. You must be talking about the Olcott Problem again, because the contradiction is inherent in the Halting Problem.
>
Not when its terrible mistake is corrected.
>If the code is unreachable, it can't be part of a working program, so simply remove it.It starts with the assumption that a universal halt decider can be written, and then shows that such a decider can be used to devise a program that the 'universal' decider can't decide --- a contradiction.>
>
But you already know all this.
>
I already know that the contradictory part of the
counter-example input has always been unreachable code.
It is only unreachable by DD correctly emulated by HHH.Thus PROOF BY CONTRADICTION FAILS because there neverI know precisely what unreachable code is.
was any actual contradiction. It has been a false assumption
that there has been a contradiction for 90 years.
>
If you have no idea what unreachable code is you won't
get this.
Take it out. It's unreachable, so it cannot contribute to the work of the program. Why did you bother to put it in?
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.