Re: My reviewers think that halt deciders must report on the behavior of their caller

On 7/10/2025 5:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.jul.2025 om 15:02 schreef olcott:>

All Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping
from their actual inputs. This entails that they never
compute any mapping from non-inputs.

 At least one thing you understand.
 

*From the bottom of page 319 has been adapted to this*
https://www.liarparadox.org/Peter_Linz_HP_317-320.pdf
*The Linz proof does not understand this*
When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.∞
   *if Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts, and*
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
   *if Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ does not halt*

>

The evidence is that the input includes the code to abort and halt,

>
abort and stop running
*IS NOT THE SAME THING AS*
abort and halt

 Another claim without evidence.
 

*It is common knowledge in the theory of computation*
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer