Re: The error of the halting problem

On 2024-06-04 00:59:48 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/3/2024 7:55 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/3/24 4:53 PM, olcott wrote:

For any program H that might determine whether programs halt, a
"pathological" program D, called with some input, can pass its own
source and its input to H and then specifically do the opposite of what
H predicts D will do. No H can exist that handles this case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem
 The way that the halting problem is conventionally understood is that H
must correctly answer yes or no to an input that contradicts both
answers, thus H is being asked a question isomorphic to the Liar
Paradox: Is this sentence true or false: "This sentence is not true." ?

 But it doesn't reduce to that, as the decider was fixed in code first, and then, by using that code, a question is constructed WITH A RIGHT ANSWER, that just isn't the answer that this decider happens to give.
 You just don't seem to understand logic well enough to understand that not that subtitle difference.
 

 In other words you are trying to get away with saying
that it is only random chance that H gets the wrong
answer not that the game is rigged against H.

It is not really a game. Halting problem is a problem the same way as
doubling a cube, trisecting an angle and squating a circle, which are
konwn as the three classical problems of Euclidean geometry. If you
want to call them "rigged" then you can call halting problem the same
way but most people would reserve the word "rigged" for a different
use.
--
Mikko