Sujet : Re: Position Paper: Why Simulating Halt Deciders (SHDs) Require a Reframing of the Halting Problem
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 25. May 2025, 09:08:22
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <100uj5m$19b6k$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2025-05-24 18:12:16 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Sat, 24 May 2025 12:38:20 -0500, olcott wrote:
My SHD refutes the classical halting problem proof that same way that
ZFC refutes Russell's Paradox.
ZFC Doesn’t Refute Russell’s Paradox — It Avoids It
ZFC doesn’t show Russell’s paradox is false — it restricts the language so
that the paradoxical construction is no longer valid.
Likewise, your SHD does not refute the Halting Problem proof — it merely
redefines the space of programs it will consider.
More importantly, it solves another problem instead of the unsolvable one.
-- Mikko
Re: Position Paper: Why Simulating Halt Deciders (SHDs) Require a Reframing of the Halting Problem
Re: Position Paper: Why Simulating Halt Deciders (SHDs) Require a Reframing of the Halting Problem