Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) --- Boilerplate Reply

On 6/21/2024 4:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/21/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/21/2024 3:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/21/24 3:45 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/21/2024 2:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/21/24 3:19 PM, olcott wrote:

int sum(int x, int y){ return x + y; }
When this program is asked: sum(3,4) this maps to 7.
When this program is asked: sum(5,6) this DOES NOT map to 7.

>
Right.
>

>
When H is asked H(D,D) this maps to D correctly simulated by H.
When H is asked H(D,D) this DOES NOT map to behavior that halts.
>
>

>
Nope. H(M,d) is DEFINED (if it is correct) to determine if M(d) will Halt.
>

>
If one "defines" that the input to H(D,D) maps to the behavior
of D(D) yet cannot show this because it does not actually
map to that behavior *THEN THE DEFINITION IS SIMPLY WRONG*

>
But we CAN show that it maps to the behavior of D(D) (at least when the representation of D includes the H that is giving the 0 answer) by just runnig it and seeing what it does.
>

>
No you cannot show that the mapping for the input to
H(D,D) maps to the behavior of D(D).

 The DEFINITION of a Halt Decider gives what H is SUPPOSED to do, if it is one.
 You claim it is a correct Halt decider
 

When we do not simply make false assumptions about the
behavior that the input to H(D,D) specifies:
   That the call from D correctly simulated by H to H(D,D) returns
Then H(D,D) does correctly report on the actual behavior
that its input specifies.
You can see that this call does not return yet claim
that it returns anyway... The mindset of a Liar or
one indoctrinated as the Moonies were indoctrinated.
Moon's book, The Divine Principle, informs the beliefs
of the Unification Church. Moon considered himself the
Second Coming of Christ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unification_Church
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer