Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP

On 14/05/2025 18:22, olcott wrote:

On 5/14/2025 12:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 14/05/2025 17:43, olcott wrote:

<snip>

>

The proof itself cannot exist because it is
missing a key element.

>
The proof exists. Check the literature. It's complete, and it's not missing anything.
>

 You INSIST on not paying enough attention.

Read it for yourself.
https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Turing_Paper_1936.pdf
QED.

When you try to encode *AN INPUT* that actually
does the opposite of whatever value that
its termination analyzer returns in a fully
specified language such as C you will find
this is impossible.

When you try to encode *A PROGRAM* that actually computes for arbitrary program P and data X whether applying P to X results in P halting, you will find this is impossible.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within