Re: HHH(DD) --- COMPUTE ACTUAL MAPPING FROM INPUT TO OUTPUT

On 4/21/25 4:24 PM, olcott wrote:

On 4/21/2025 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-04-20 05:14:08 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 4/19/2025 2:42 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-04-18 16:19:23 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 4/18/2025 8:27 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 23:24:22 +0100, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>

On 16/04/2025 22:01, Mr Flibble wrote:

I, aka Mr Flibble, have uniquely identified this category error and
have thus solved the halting problem

>
No, Mr Flibble, you have solved the Mr Flibble Problem. Well done! You
may award yourself whatever cash prize you can find in your piggy bank.
Well done!
>
And now you'd hurry back to using all those naughty words while your
mummy's still out at the shops.

>
Partial deciders are a thing,

>
Yes they are and termination analyzers only need
be correct on at least one input.

>
Even in situations where an analyzer cannot determine the right answer
it must not give the wrong answer. Not halting is OK, and so is to say
that the answer cannot be determined.

>
Cases of semantically invalid inputs must be rejected
as erroneous.

>
Every syntactically valid input describes a computation that either
halts or does not halt and therefore is always semantically valid.
>
A halt decider cannot reject any input.

 If you run into a self-contradictory expression and
do not reject it as semantically invalid you are stupidly wrong.

But you need to go back to the source of the self-contradiction to fix the system.

 If the otherwise brilliant Tarski did not begin
by stupidly assuming that a falsehood is true
he would not have made his stupid Undefinability
theorem mistake.

He didn't, he showed that the assumption of the existance of a truth predicate leads to that conclusion.

 Truth is a necessary consequence of applying the truth
preserving operation of semantic entailment to the set
of basic facts (cannot be derived from other facts)
expressed in language.
Copyright 2025 PL Olcott

Not his definition, so you can't use it in his proof.
You are just showing you don't understand the fields you are talking about.

 

The requirement to give the
correct answer applies only to syntactically valid inputs. Otherwise
it need not halt but if it does it is free to give any answer.
>