Re: Two computer science professors agree with Flibble

On 5/4/25 11:10 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/4/2025 10:00 PM, dbush wrote:

On 5/4/2025 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/4/2025 8:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>

On 04/05/2025 23:34, Mr Flibble wrote:

The function is neither computable nor incomputable because there is no
function at all, just a category error.

>
It's a point of view.

>
It's a point of view only in the sense that there is no opinion so daft
that it's not someone's point of view.  The technical-sounding waffle
about it being a "category error" is simply addressed by asking where
the supposed category error is in other perfectly straightforward
undecidable problems.  For example, whether or not a context-free
grammar is ambiguous or not, or the very simple to pose Post
correspondence problem.
>

>
Flibble IS CORRECT when the halting problem is defined
to be isomorphic (AKA analogous) to the Liar Paradox:
"This sentence is not true".
>
When the Halting Problem is defined as an input that
does the opposite of whatever its decider reports
then both Boolean return values are incorrect

>
False.  One value is correct and one is incorrect.
>

 Both Boolean RETURN VALUES FROM H *ARE* INCORRECT,
Even though D halts or fails to halt.

No, the given H can only return one of the values.
The other one is correct.

 The linguistic context of WHO IS ASKED is an essential
part of the question.

No, because H^ has the same behavior to all deciders, it only makes H wrong, as it behaves the opposite of whichever is the one answer that H gives.

 Math and Comp Sci people that are clueless about these
details of how language actually works think that they
can get away with ignoring a crucial part of the actual
question.

No, you are clueless as to the requirements of H being a program / fixed algorithm.
You can't ask the question until you choose which decider you are going to claim you are going to make your example correct decider,
Then the challenger can make an input, custom taylored for THAT one decider that it will get wrong.
Your problem is you don't understand that programs are not willful, but fully deterministic, and thus don't have choice.

 

The answer given by the algorithm doing the deciding for the algorithm described by the input is the incorrect one.