Sujet : Re: Formal systems that cannot possibly be incomplete except for unknowns and unknowable
De : rjh (at) *nospam* cpax.org.uk (Richard Heathfield)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 07. May 2025, 22:30:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Fix this later
Message-ID : <vvgjdo$18i6e$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 07/05/2025 20:35, olcott wrote:
On 5/7/2025 1:59 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 07/05/2025 19:31, olcott wrote:
<snip>
>
I already know that the contradictory part of the
counter-example input has always been unreachable code.
>
If the code is unreachable, it can't be part of a working program, so simply remove it.
It is unreachable by the Halting Problem counter-example
input D when correctly simulated by the simulating
termination analyzer H that it has been defined to thwart.
If the simulation can't reach code that the directly executed program reaches, then it's not a faithful simulation.
<snip>
If you have no idea what unreachable code is you won't
get this.
>
I know precisely what unreachable code is.
>
Take it out. It's unreachable, so it cannot contribute to the work of the program. Why did you bother to put it in?
>
It is only unreachable by DD correctly emulated by HHH.
Then it's not a correct emulation, so you have a contradiction.
Thus the "proof by contradiction" fails BECAUSE THERE
IS NO CONTRADICTION there never has been.
Whoops, we just found another one.
-- Richard HeathfieldEmail: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
…