Re: The error of the halting problem

On 6/3/2024 9:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/3/24 10:32 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/3/2024 9:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/3/24 10:14 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/3/2024 8:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/3/24 9:51 PM, olcott wrote:

>
When H is asked a yes/no question where both answers are
contradicted by its input *IT IS A FREAKING RIGGED GAME*

>
But both answers aren't wrong. Remember, the question is built to make a SPECIFIC decider wrong, and by its algorithm, it will give a SPECIFIC answer to each SPECIFIC question.
>

>
You can't get away with that head game by pretending
to not understand what infinite an set of H/D pairs is.

>
But it doesn't matter.
>

>
It matters enormously. Once we fully understand that the limits
of computation were always a ruse then we can give computation
the priority that it truly deserves. It might be the life on earth
is killed off because we did not build a semantic lie detector
quickly enough.

 But you are working on it wrong, because you just don't understand the actual nature of truth.

Every expression X that is true on the basis of its meaning can be
proven untrue by a lack of a connection to the meaning that makes it
true. *You have understood this better than anyone else*
When D is defined to contradict both values that H returns then
D is not a truth bearer in H in the same way that the Liar Paradox
"This sentence is not true" is not a truth bearer in English.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer