Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 24/05/2025 01:36, Keith Thompson wrote:int DD()Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:No no no, it halts! (Assuming we're discussing the computation DD() with PO's code.)Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:>Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:>
[...]And the big picture is that this can be done because false is the>
correct halting decision for some halting computations. He has said
this explicitly (as I have posted before) but he has also explained it
in words:
>
| When-so-ever a halt decider correctly determines that its input would
| never halt unless forced to halt by this halt decider this halt
| decider has made a correct not-halting determination.
Hmm. I don't read that the way you do. Did I miss something?
>
It assumes that the input is a non-halting computation ("its input
would never halt") and asserts that, in certain circumstances,
his mythical halt decider correctly determines that the input
is non-halting.
>
When his mythical halt decider correctly determines that its input
doesn't halt, it has made a correct non-halting determination.
It's just a tautology.
It would be a tautology but for the "unless..." part. It does not make
the determination that it does not halt. It determines that it would
not halt were it not for the fact that the decider (a simulation) in
fact halts it.
Right, so the computation itself is non-halting.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.