Re: ChatGPT totally understands exactly how I refuted the conventional halting problem proof technique

On 6/22/25 10:38 AM, olcott wrote:

On 6/21/2025 11:01 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}

>

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6857335b37a08191a077d57039fa4a76
ChatGPT agrees that I have correctly refuted every
halting problem proof technique that relies on the above
pattern.

>
That's neither here nor there.  The plain fact is you have NOT refuted
any proof technique.  How could you, you don't even understand what is
meant by proof?
>

 A proof is any sequence of steps such that its conclusion
can be correctly determined to be necessarily true.

And must start with KNOWN CORRECT premises, and uses only KNOQN GOOD operation.
Since YOU argument starts with incorrrect definitions, it is not a proof.

 

You have merely deluded yourself, spending year after year failing to
understand the simplest elements of computation theory, something a
maths or computer science undergraduate grasps in a very few hours at
most.
>
This stuff simply isn't your thing.  Instead, you could and should do
something worthwhile with however much longer you have to live.
>

 Then you could find one mistake, so far no one has.

Sure we have, you just ignore them, as you have demonstrated by your presistant refusal to answer the problem
You have actually admitted to the basic facts that show that your proof is just based on pathological lies, and effectively admitted that you know that (due to your refusal to answer the refutations).
Sorry, You do NOT have a "Right to remain silent" when the charge is that you statements are wrong, and the basic evidence of that is presented.
Failure to show the error in that statement is just an admissition that you have no response, and are admitting to the error.
You might be able to make an arguement if you had responded to a number of them, and there were a few outstanding, but you have failed to respond to the vast majority with anything besides just restating the error and claiming it must be right.
That is just the logical equivalent of a guilty plea.

 

-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

>