Re: DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly halt (Halting Problem) --- mindless robots

On 4/14/25 9:14 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/14/2025 7:39 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 14/04/2025 12:56, olcott wrote:
>
<snip>
>

When people insist that a termination analyzer reports
on behavior other than the behavior that its finite string
input specifies this is isomorphic to requiring a perfectly
geometric square circle in the same two dimensional plane,
simply logically impossible, thus an incorrect requirement.

>
A termination analyzer that works is simply logically impossible, thus an incorrect requirement.
>

 <Sarcasm>
Yes and Tarki is right because we are supposed to be able
to prove that self-contradictory expressions are true.
</sarcasm>
 

No, Tarski shows that if we assume that a Truth Predicate exists, then the logic shows that it IS TRUE that a self-contradictory expression is true.
You have the results half right, the proog does come to an impossible conclusion, but you think it must have an error, but the real answer is that the proof shows that the explisitly made presuposition must be wrong, and thus the proof by contradiction proves the desire result.
Of course, it seems that the whole idea of "Proof by Contradiction" is beyond your understanding, as having contradictions in your proofs is just a normal feature of your logic.