Re: Refutation of the Halting Problem Assuming the Self-Referential Paradox is a Category Error --- Linz Proof

On 4/26/2025 4:30 PM, dbush wrote:

On 4/26/2025 5:26 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/26/2025 3:56 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:

Refutation of the Halting Problem Assuming the Self-Referential Paradox is
a Category Error in All Computational Models and the Mathematical Universe
Hypothesis is True
>

>
Yes and you are one of three people in the world that knows this.
You acquired expertise about this in about a year where most
people are indoctrinated into "received view" by mindless conformity.
Even Christ knew that people are sheep.
>
The other thing about the Halting Problem is that
a simulating halt decider proves that the contradictory
part has always been unreachable code.
>
When we apply the finite string transformation rules
specified by the Turing Machine language to the input
to the Linz proof

 Which starts with the assumption that an H exists that computes the following mapping:
  Given any algorithm (i.e. a fixed immutable sequence of instructions) X described as <X> with input Y:
 A solution to the halting problem is an algorithm H that computes the following mapping:
 (<X>,Y) maps to 1 if and only if X(Y) halts when executed directly
(<X>,Y) maps to 0 if and only if X(Y) does not halt when executed directly
 

THAT IS NOT ALLOWED because that cannot possibly be derived
by applying the finite string transformation rules specified
by the x86 language to the input to HHH(DD).
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer