Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/4/2025 1:38 PM, olcott wrote:We can be more vague and say there is a mappingOn 5/4/2025 11:57 AM, dbush wrote:Category error. A mapping is an association between an input domain and an output domain, not a C function call to a value.On 5/4/2025 12:06 PM, olcott wrote:>On 5/3/2025 4:28 PM, dbush wrote:>On 5/3/2025 3:45 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:>>>
I am conscious that you have already explained to me (twice!) that Mr O's approach is aimed not at overturning the overarching indecidability proof but a mere detail of Linz's proof. Unfortunately, your explanations have not managed to establish a firm root in what passes for my brain. This may be because I'm too dense to grok them, or possibly it's because your explanations are TOAST (see above).
>
You have said, I think, that Olcott doesn't need a universal decider in order to prove his point. But a less ambitious decider doesn't contradict Linz's proof, surely? So once more for luck, what exactly would PO be establishing with his non-universal and impatient simulator if he could only get it to work?
The core issue is that PO, despise being nearly 70 and having worked as a programmer, fundamentally doesn't understand proof by contradiction.
>
The actual issue is the NO ONE here (or perhaps anywhere)
sufficiently understands the key details about
COMPUTING THE MAPPING FROM AN INPUT TO AN OUTPUT.
>
Many here know that a mapping from the input must be
computed.
False. There is no requirement that a mapping is computable. The halting function is one such mapping, as Linz and others have proved and you have *explictly* agreed is correct.
>
>What they don't know are ALL of the tiny>
detailed steps required to compute this mapping.
>
And if the mapping isn't computable, like the halting function, there are no such steps.
>
int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
The mapping from sum(3,2) to sum 5 + 6 does not
exist
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.