Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways

Liste des GroupesRevenir à s logic 
Sujet : Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logic
Date : 07. Jun 2024, 04:08:25
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <v3tq2p$388rj$9@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 6/6/24 9:23 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/6/2024 3:45 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-05 17:09:18 +0000, olcott said:
>
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:
But the question it asks is an OBJECTIVE question that doesn't depend on who it is asked of.
>
>
When H is asked about the behavior of a Machine that is programmed
to do the opposite of whatever it says then the context that it is H
that is being asked is an inherent aspect of the meaning of this
question and cannot be correctly ignored.
>
Every machine does something. It either halts, or it doesn't. If a machine halts, then it halts even if you ask someone different. If the machine halts when I ask Bob whether it halts and he says it halts, then it still halts when I ask Alice whether it halts and she says it doesn't halt. Alice is wrong. The linguistic context doesn't change the fact that it halts.
>
Professor Hehner proves my same point with Carol's question.
https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/OSS.pdf
>
Richard found a loophole that I fixed and told professor Hehner about:
Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this (yes/no) question?
>
>
It's not "Can Carol" - it's "Does Carol"
>
*Disagreeing with verified facts does not count as any rebuttal*
I inserted "(yes/no)" to close the loophole that Richard found.
>
That addition does not constrain what Carol can say. Whether that
makes "Absolutely not" an incorrect answer is another problem.
>
 Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this [yes/no] question?
      ...is a consistent, satisfiable specification for some
     agent (anyone other than Carol), and an inconsistent,
     unsatisfiable specification for some agent (Carol). (Hehner:2017)
 If Carol answers “no” to this question she is saying that “no” is the
wrong answer, if she is correct then “no” is the right answer making her
necessarily incorrect.
 If Carol answers “yes” to this question she is saying that “no” is the
correct answer thus making “yes” necessarily the wrong answer.
 Thus both [yes, no] are the wrong answer from Carol, thus “no” is the
correct answer from anyone else.
 When anyone or machine is asked a yes/no question and this
yes/no question has no correct answer from this person or
machine because both yes and no are contradicted then this
is an incorrect question. I first brought this up in this
forum back in 2004.
 
Except you forget that the Halting Question DOES have a correct answer, since it is only asked about a SPECIFIC machine, and that machine will either Halt or not. The key point is that H^ is constructed using a copy of H, to make what ever answer H will give to be wrong. And it can do that, as it is property of this class of programs that they always give the same answer to the same input, and H is forced to answer to be a decider.

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed (PART-TWO)  sci.logic
On 6/20/2004 11:31 AM, Peter Olcott wrote:
 > PREMISES:
 > (1) The Halting Problem was specified in such a way that a solution
 > was defined to be impossible.
 >
 > (2) The set of questions that are defined to not have any possible
 > correct answer(s) forms a proper subset of all possible questions.
 > …
 > CONCLUSION:
 > Therefore the Halting Problem is an ill-formed question.
 >
USENET Message-ID:
<kZiBc.103407$Gx4.18142@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 *Direct Link to original message*
http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3CkZiBc.103407%24Gx4.18142%40bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net%3E+
  

Date Sujet#  Auteur
3 Jun 24 * Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?172immibis
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?2Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 i`- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1wij
3 Jun 24 +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?149Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review19olcott
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
3 Jun 24 ii+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 ii`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review16Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 ii `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review15olcott
4 Jun 24 ii  +- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii  `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review13Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii   `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review12olcott
4 Jun 24 ii    `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review11Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii     `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review10olcott
4 Jun 24 ii      +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 ii      i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii      `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review6Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 ii       `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review5olcott
4 Jun 24 ii        +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review3Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review2olcott
5 Jun 24 ii        i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 ii        `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Mikes Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1wij
3 Jun 24 i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1wij
3 Jun 24 i`* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?127Ben Bacarisse
3 Jun 24 i +* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review125olcott
3 Jun 24 i i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1immibis
3 Jun 24 i i+* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review85Fred. Zwarts
3 Jun 24 i ii`* Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts84olcott
4 Jun 24 i ii +* Re: Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts82Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i ii i`* Re: Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts81Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i ii i `* Re: Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts80Mike Terry
4 Jun 24 i ii i  `* How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error79olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error28John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error27olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error26John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error25olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error24John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i    +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error5olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i    i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error4John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i    i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error3olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i    i  +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i    i  `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error18Ben Bacarisse
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i     +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting --- Ben's strawman deception2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i     i`- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting --- Ben's strawman deception1olcon'tt
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i     `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error15Mike Terry
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i      `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error14olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i       +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error6John Smith
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i       i+* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error2olcott
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i       ii`- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1joes
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i       i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error3Mike Terry
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i       i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error !!!2olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i       i  `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error !!!1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   i       `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error7Mike Terry
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i        `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error6olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i   i         `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error5Mike Terry
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i          `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error4olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i           +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i           `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error2olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i   i            `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
5 Jun 24 i ii i   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error49olcott
6 Jun 24 i ii i    +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
6 Jun 24 i ii i    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error47olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis45olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis13Python
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis12olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii +* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis7Python
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis6olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis4olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i  +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis ---2olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii i   `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis ---1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii +- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii `* Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis3olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  +- Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1news2
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  `- Re: How Partial Simulations incorrectly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i+* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis24olcott
7 Jun 24 i ii i     ii+- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis1Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?22olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?21Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii  `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?20olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii   `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?19Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii    `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?18olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii     `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?17Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii      `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?16olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii       `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?15Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii        `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?14olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii         `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?13Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii          `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?12olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii           `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?11Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii            `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?10olcott
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii             `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?9Richard Damon
8 Jun 24 i ii i     ii              `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?8olcott
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii               `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?7Richard Damon
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?6olcott
9 Jun 24 i ii i     ii                 `* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Should I quit Richard at this point?5Richard Damon
7 Jun 24 i ii i     i`* Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Ben's 10/2022 analysis6joes
7 Jun 24 i ii i     `- Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i ii `- Re: Mike Terry Reply to Fred Zwarts1Fred. Zwarts
4 Jun 24 i i+- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway? --- Ben's Review1Richard Damon
4 Jun 24 i i`* Halting Problem is wrong two different ways37olcott
3 Jun 24 i `- Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?1Mike Terry
3 Jun 24 `* Re: Why does Olcott care about simulation, anyway?20Fred. Zwarts

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal