Re: What it would take... People to address my points with reasoning instead of rhetoric -- RP

On 5/14/2025 12:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 14/05/2025 17:43, olcott wrote:

On 5/14/2025 11:16 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 14/05/2025 17:04, olcott wrote:
>
<snip>
>

The HP proofs require an input D that can actually
do the opposite of whatever value that H returns.
Such an input cannot possibly exist.

>
Agreed. That is precisely what Turing proved.
>

>
You did not pay enough attention.

 Yes, I did.
 

The proof itself cannot exist because it is
missing a key element.

 The proof exists. Check the literature. It's complete, and it's not missing anything.
 

You INSIST on not paying enough attention.
When you try to encode *AN INPUT* that actually
does the opposite of whatever value that
its termination analyzer returns in a fully
specified language such as C you will find
this is impossible.
In a less fully specified language it is far
too easy to get confused about what *AN INPUT*
is and what it is not.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer