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 : rjh (at) *nospam* cpax.org.uk (Richard Heathfield)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 22. May 2025, 03:43:52
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Fix this later
Message-ID : <100m319$38k55$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 22/05/2025 00:14, olcott wrote:
On 5/21/2025 6:11 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 21/05/2025 23:34, olcott wrote:
On 5/21/2025 4:21 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 21/05/2025 21:28, olcott wrote:
>
<snip>
>
no one ever
tried to completely encode every detail.
>
Why would they? One would have to be pretty stupid to try.
>
>
<snip>
>
Show an actual input to HHH that actually does
the opposite of whatever value that HHH returns.
>
You don't listen good, do you?
>
Turing proved that what you're asking is impossible.
>
 That is not what he proved.
Then you'll be able to write a universal termination analyser that can correctly report for any program and any input whether it halts. Good luck with that.
--
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

Date Sujet#  Auteur
29 Jun 26 o  …

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal