Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's

On 2025-05-10 20:38:57 +0000, Mr Flibble said:

How my refutation differs to Peter's:
 * Peter refutes the halting problem based on pathological input
manifesting in a simulating halt decider as infinite recursion, this being
treated as non-halting.
* Flibble refutes the halting problem based on patholgical input
manifesting as decider/input self-referencial conflation, resulting in the
contradiction at the heart of the halting problem being a category (type)
error, i.e. ill-formed.
 These two refutations are related but not exactly the same.

The similarities are more important that differences, in particular
on similarity: neither one refutes anything.
--
Mikko