Re: Turing Machine computable functions apply finite string transformations to inputs VERIFIED FACT

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> writes:
[...]

Because you don't pay any attention at all
you did not bother to notice that I have never been
attacking the Halting Problem only the conventional
Halting Problem proof.

[...]

That's some interesting news, at least to me.

I was under the impression that you had explicitly claimed to have
solved the Halting Problem.  I don't read most of what you write,
and I don't remember all of what I've read, so my impression may
have been mistaken.

Now you're saying that you're only attacking the conventional proof.

That's a far less interesting claim than what I've always thought
you were claming.

An analogy, someone might claim to have discovered a flaw in Euclid's
proof of the Pythagorean Theorem.  That would be interesting, if it
were true, but it would have no effect on the Pythagorean Theorem
itself.  There have probably been thousands of other proofs, and
unless you can invalidate *all* of them, the theorem still stands.

I don't know what proofs of the insolubility of the Halting Problem
exist other than the commonly known one, but finding a flaw in
the commonly known proof does not imply that the Halting Problem
is solvable.

Do you have anything to say about whether the Halting Problem
is solvable?

(And I don't believe you've actually found a flaw in the proof.
I don't know the topic well enough to state definitively that you
haven't, but I've seen no such evidence.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */