Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD)

On Sun, 2025-05-11 at 17:00 -0500, olcott wrote:
[cut]

ZFC corrected the error in set theory so that
it could resolve Russell's Paradox. The original
set theory has now called naive set theory.
 
I corrected the error of the HP that expects
HHH to report on behavior that is different
than the behavior that its input actually
specifies.

 
Specificly, "Halt(D)=1 iff D() halts" is an error?
And it should expect: Halt(D)=1 iff POOH(D)=1 (correct problem)?
 

 
Yes that is an error because the behavior that
the input to HHH(DDD) specifies is the behavior
that HHH must report on.

If so, how do we know a given function e.g. D, halts or not by giving it to H,
i.e. H(D)? Wrong question (according to you)?
Instead, every time we want to know whether D halts or not, we should ask
POOH(D)? Because you said 'halt' means "the input to HHH(DDD) specifies is the
behavior that HHH must report on."

And, how is POOH useful to AI and human if POOH cannot be reproduced?