Re: Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem Proof

[ Followup-To: set ]

In comp.theory Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:13:43 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/20/25 12:58 AM, olcott wrote:

Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem Proof

Author: PL Olcott

Abstract:
This paper presents a formal critique of the standard proof of the
undecidability of the Halting Problem. While we do not dispute the
conclusion that the Halting Problem is undecidable, we argue that the
conventional proof fails to establish this conclusion due to a
fundamental misapplication of Turing machine semantics. Specifically,
we show that the contradiction used in the proof arises from conflating
the behavior of encoded simulations with direct execution, and from
making assumptions about a decider's domain that do not hold under a
rigorous model of computation.

Your problem is you don't understand the meaning of the words you are
using.

This is an ad hominem attack, not argumentation.

Maybe it was you wanting to create that impression by dishonestly
snipping the substance of Richard's post, where he illustrated some of
the words whose meaning PO fails to understand.

You seem far too ready to shout "AD HOMINEM!" whenever a post contains
personal criticism.  It's a cheap tool, and you use it dishonestly, as
you did in your last post.

It is a generally acknowledged fact that PO's understanding of the
topic dominating this newsgroup is far from good.  Part of that is his
failure to understand the meaning of the technical words he uses.  To
write this from time to time is entirely legitimate.

/Flibble

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).