Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:Still a tautology.
Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:It would be a tautology but for the "unless..." part. It does not makeMike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> writes:[...]And the big picture is that this can be done because false is the>
correct halting decision for some halting computations. He has said
this explicitly (as I have posted before) but he has also explained it
in words:
>
| When-so-ever a halt decider correctly determines that its input would
| never halt unless forced to halt by this halt decider this halt
| decider has made a correct not-halting determination.
Hmm. I don't read that the way you do. Did I miss something?
>
It assumes that the input is a non-halting computation ("its input
would never halt") and asserts that, in certain circumstances,
his mythical halt decider correctly determines that the input
is non-halting.
>
When his mythical halt decider correctly determines that its input
doesn't halt, it has made a correct non-halting determination.
It's just a tautology.
the determination that it does not halt. It determines that it would
not halt were it not for the fact that the decider (a simulation) in
fact halts it.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.