Sujet : Re: Refutation of the Peter Linz Halting Problem proof 2024-03-05 --partial agreement--
De : polcott2 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 08. Mar 2024, 18:15:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <usfdia$1p8cg$5@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/8/2024 10:09 AM, immibis wrote:
On 8/03/24 07:30, olcott wrote:
Ĥ.H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ <Ĥ> immediately detects that is about to simulate a
copy of itself with a copy of its own input thus immediately
detects recursive simulation just like H(D,D).
>
H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ <H> immediately detects that is NOT about to simulate a
copy of itself with a copy of its own input thus immediately
rejects recursive simulation just like H1(D,D).
And what about Ĥ.H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ <H> ?
Let's first determine that Olcott machines refute
the uncomputability of the Peter Linz ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩.
Because my cancer came back in less than 24 months that
means I don't have time for endless divergence.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer