Re: Analysis of Flibble’s Latest: Detecting vs. Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: Analysis of Flibble’s Latest: Detecting vs. Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 21. May 2025, 19:48:16
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <100l75g$2vpq3$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/21/2025 1:17 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 21/05/2025 18:47, olcott wrote:
On 5/21/2025 12:16 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 21/05/2025 17:51, olcott wrote:
On 5/21/2025 11:09 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
<snip>
>
That an algorithm for ascertaining whether an arbitrary program with arbitrary input halts cannot actually exist is precisely what the Halting Problem proves.
>
If you think that it can exist then prove that it
exists by encoding it in C.
>
It can't exist. The Halting Problem proves that it can't. I said that already.
>
>
*PAY ATTENTION*
I am saying that a key element of the halting problem
proof cannot exist, thus the proof itself cannot exist.
 Yes, it can, and it does.
 Watch.
 
Show how to define a D that actually does the opposite
of what its termination analyzer reports.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
29 Jun 26 o  …

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal