Re: Analysis of Flibble’s Latest: Detecting vs. Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC

On 2025-05-22 18:46:10 +0000, olcott said:

On 5/22/2025 1:33 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 22/05/2025 19:16, olcott wrote:
 <snip>
 

In other words you are too scatterbrained to keep
focused on a single point until closure is achieved.

 Closure happened in 1936.
 

 *CLOSURE ON THIS POINT HAS NEVER BEEN ACHIEVED*
 When you try to define an input D to simulating termination
analyzer H that actually does the opposite of whatever value
that H returns you find that this
KEY ELEMENT OF THE CONVENTIONAL HALTING
PROBLEM PROOFS CANNOT POSSIBLY EXIST.

Unless H is a counter-example to the Church-Turing thesis it
is possible to construct such D and prove that H is not a
halting decider.
--
Mikko