Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s logic 
Sujet : Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.com (joes)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 05. Jun 2024, 19:33:14
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <v3qb1a$34b9u$14@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:09:18 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 6/5/2024 12:03 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5/06/24 04:16, olcott wrote:
On 6/4/2024 9:12 PM, John Smith wrote:
On 5/06/24 04:05, olcott wrote:
On 6/4/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
(6) Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this question?
Let's ask Carol. If she says “yes”, she's saying that “no” is the
correct answer for her, so “yes” is incorrect. If she says “no”, she's
saying that she cannot correctly answer “no”, which is her answer. We
are assuming for this and all subsequent questions that the only
acceptable answers are “yes” and “no”, and in this case, both answers
are incorrect. Carol cannot answer the question correctly. Now let's ask
Dave. He says “no”, and he is correct because Carol cannot correctly
answer “no”. So (6) is subjective because it is a consistent,
satisfiable specification for some agent (anyone other than Carol), and
an inconsistent, unsatisfiable specification for some agent (Carol).
But that's like running a different machine. That's not interesting.
We wanted to see a machine that can answer ALL questions. This one was
specifically constructed to be unanswerable by this machine. The
equivalent translation would be "Can YOU answer No?".

--
joes

Date Sujet#  Auteur
3 Jun 24 * Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?149Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review19olcott
3 Jun 24 i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review16Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 i `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review15olcott
4 Jun 24 i  +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review13Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 i   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review12olcott
4 Jun 24 i    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review11Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review10olcott
4 Jun 24 i      +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i      i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 i      i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i      `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review6Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 i       `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5olcott
4 Jun 24 i        +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i        i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 i        i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i        `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
27 May 25 +- 
3 Jun 24 `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1wij

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal