Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 07. Jun 2024, 08:22:50
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <v3u8vq$1v5pb$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2024-06-06 15:18:21 +0000, olcott said:

On 6/6/2024 10:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-06 13:48:29 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/6/2024 4:34 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-05 13:18:24 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/5/2024 2:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-04 17:40:47 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/4/2024 3:28 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-03 18:14:39 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/3/2024 9:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-03 12:20:01 +0000, olcott said:
 
On 6/3/2024 4:42 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> writes:
 
PO's D(D) halts, as illustrated in various traces that have been posted here.
PO's H(D,D) returns 0 : [NOT halting] also as illustrated in various traces.
i.e. exactly as the Linz proof claims.  PO has acknowledged both these
results.  Same for the HH/DD variants.
 You might imagine that's the end of the matter - PO failed.  :)
 That's right, but PO just carries on anyway!
 He has quite explicitly stated that false (0) is the correct result for
H(D,D) "even though D(D) halts".  I am mystified why anyone continues to
discuss the matter until he equally explicitly repudiates that claim.
 
 Deciders only compute the mapping *from their inputs* to their own
accept or reject state.
 That does not restrict what a problem statement can specify.
If the computed mapping differs from the specified one the
decider does not solve the problem.
 int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
sum(2,3) cannot return the sum of 5 + 6.
 That does not restrict what a problem statement can specify.
If the mapping computed by sum differs from the specified one
the program sum does not solve the problem.
 
 On 6/3/2024 9:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > Because you keep on mentioning about DD Halting,
 > which IS about the direct execution of DD
 Only when one contradicts the definition of a decider that must
compute the mapping FROM ITS INPUTS BASED ON THE ACTUAL BEHAVIOR
OF THESE INPUTS (as measured by DD correctly simulated by HH).
 When we go ahead and contradict this definition then the
*HALTING PROBLEM IS STILL WRONG IN A DIFFERENT WAY*
 When D is defined to do the opposite of whatever yes/no
an answer that H provides then the counter-example input
is precisely isomorphic to the question:
Is this sentence: "This sentence is not true." true or false?
Thus that question and the HP question are both incorrect
because both yes and no are the wrong answer.
 The theory of computation may be ignorant of the details of
how the context of who is asked a question changes the meaning
of this question, none-the-less this cannot be ignored.
It is and remains incorrect for the theory of computation
to ignore this.
 Nice to see that you don't disagree with my observation that
your statement
 
Deciders only compute the mapping *from their inputs* to their own
accept or reject state.
 does not restrict what a problem statement can specify.
 
 Sure it does.
int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
sum(3,4) cannot correctly return the sum of 5 + 6.
 That does not restrict what the problem statement can specify.
 
 When someone tries to prove that sum(3,4) is incorrect on the
basis that it cannot correctly provide the sum of 5 + 6, then
they are wrong.
 Meybe, maybe not. That depends on the requirements. In any case,
that does not restrict what the problem statement can specify.
 
 *Here is that problem statement*
Prove that sum(3,4) is incorrect on the basis that
sum(3,4) cannot and does not provide the sum of 5 + 6.
That problem statement does not restrict what another
problem statement may specify.
--
Mikko

Date Sujet#  Auteur
3 Jun 24 * Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?332immibis
3 Jun 24 +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?309Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review29olcott
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 ii`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review26Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 ii `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review25olcott
4 Jun 24 ii  +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review23Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review22olcott
4 Jun 24 ii    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review21Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review20olcott
4 Jun 24 ii      +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review13Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review12olcott
5 Jun 24 ii      i +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 ii      i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review10Mikko
5 Jun 24 ii      i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review9olcott
5 Jun 24 ii      i   +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2wij
5 Jun 24 ii      i   i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1olcott
6 Jun 24 ii      i   +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5Mikko
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review4olcott
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Mikko
6 Jun 24 ii      i   i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
7 Jun 24 ii      i   i   `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 ii      i   `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review6Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii       `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5olcott
4 Jun 24 ii        +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 ii        i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?279Ben Bacarisse
3 Jun 24 i +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review277olcott
3 Jun 24 i i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review73Mikko
3 Jun 24 i ii`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review72olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i ii +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review2joes
4 Jun 24 i ii i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review67Mikko
4 Jun 24 i ii i`* Halting Problem is wrong two different ways66olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
5 Jun 24 i ii i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways41Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways40olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways21John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways20olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i i  `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways15John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways14olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i+- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i`- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
5 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid5olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid3Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i i   i   `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i i     `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways17Fred. Zwarts
5 Jun 24 i ii i i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways16olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Fred. Zwarts
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i    +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   i    `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i i     +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways4Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i i     i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     i +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     i `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i i     `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways23Mikko
5 Jun 24 i ii i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways22olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i   +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways18Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways17olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways16Mikko
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways15olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways14Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i    `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways13olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i     +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i     +* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways8joes
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i`* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways7olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways6Mikko
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i  `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways5olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i   +- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1Richard Damon
9 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i   `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
8 Jun 24 i ii i   i     `* Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways3Mikko
7 Jun 24 i ii i   `- Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways1immibis
4 Jun 24 i ii `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review201Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?20Fred. Zwarts
3 Jun 24 `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal