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

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 5/1/2025 10:32 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

[ .... ]

Anyway, Linz only gives this argument because it is of historical
interest.  His "real" proof immediately follows this argument (in the
book) and is a trivial corollary of the fact, proved in chapter 11, that
not all recursively enumerable languages are recursive.  But no crank
ever addresses that proof.  I wonder why...

You wasted fifteen years of my life by your change-the-subject
form of rebuttal so I no longer tolerate that from an anyone.

What about the fact that not all recursively enumerable languages are
recursive?  An immediate corollary of which is the halting theorem?

I doubt very much you understand the above - Even I'd have to do some
reading first to get back the knowledge to understand it.

But you talk about "refuting" "the standard proofs" of the halting
theorem.  The proof Ben cited above _is_ such a standard proof - likely
simpler and more direct than anything involving emulating synthesizers,
or whatever.

So why don't you put in the time and effort to understand that proof?  It
might save a lot of wasted time and unpleasantness on this newsgroup.

[ .... ]

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).