Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Incorrect questions and halt deciders --Liars?-- Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 16:43:10 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 259 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:43:11 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9f3eb961a063c3bce678c6e8a0c550c7"; logging-data="1964082"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX198c5F/MqLMHO6IlGkWCcZs" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:BTPt+JwyOIhi673xt/D+jchynoU= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 11330 On 3/14/2024 4:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 3/14/24 12:07 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/14/2024 11:41 AM, immibis wrote: >>> On 14/03/24 06:03, olcott wrote: >>>> On 3/13/2024 11:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 3/13/24 9:29 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 3/13/2024 11:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/13/24 8:46 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/13/2024 10:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/13/24 6:35 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/13/2024 7:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/13/24 4:20 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> For any program H that might determine whether programs >>>>>>>>>>>> halt, a "pathological" program D, called with some input, >>>>>>>>>>>> can pass its own source and its input to H and then >>>>>>>>>>>> specifically do the opposite of what H predicts D will do. >>>>>>>>>>>> No H can exist that handles this case. >>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but the correct answer for the question given to H exists. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is no mapping from >>>>>>>>>> (a) Specific TM: H(D,D) to Halts(D,D) >>>>>>>>>> (b) Specific unmarried_man to stopped_beating_wife(YES/NO) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> When you ask a man that has never been married: >>>>>>>>>>>> Have you stopped beating your wife? >>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.lang/c/AO5Vlupeelo/m/nxJy7N2vULwJ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Which is a different issue. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Although there is a mapping from some men to YES/NO >>>>>>>>>>>> there is no mapping from never married men to YES/NO >>>>>>>>>>>> thus the question is incorrect for all unmarried men. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Invalid, because it asks about a non-existant person. >>>>>>>>>> and a non-existent halt decider H >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, because it presumes facts that are not true. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There is no mapping from >>>>>>>>>> (a) Specific TM: H(D,D) to Halts(D,D) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which s a lying comment since nothing in the question asks for >>>>>>>>> one. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no mapping from the specific TM/input pair H(D,D) to >>>>>>>> Halts(D,D) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Which isn't the mapping the question asks about. >>>>>>> >>>>>> The same question exists in a hierarchy of generality to specificity. >>>>>> There is a mapping from    D(D) to Halts(D,D). >>>>>> There is a mapping from H1(D,D) to Halts(D,D) >>>>>> There is no mapping from H(D,D) to Halts(D,D) >>>>> >>>>> YOU ARE JUST BEING STUPID. >>>>> >>>>> The Question, Does the Computation Described by your inpt (in this >>>>> case D(D) ) halt when run does NOT ask about a mappig from anything >>>>> OTHER than D(D) to Halts (D,D) >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is simply a degree of detail that you choose to ignore. >>>> There is a mapping from H1(D,D) to Halts(D,D)==1 >>>> There is no mapping from H(D,D) to Halts(D,D)??? >>>> >>>>> H1(D,D) or H(D,D) are NOT "more specific" thatn D(D) when asking >>>>> about D(D) >>>>> >>>>> And you are just a stupid pathological liar for saying so. >>>>> >>>>> Where on earth do you get that H1 or H are in ANY WAY a "stand-in" >>>>> for the behavior of the input they are trying to decide on. >>>>> >>>>> They are the thing being TESTED. >>>>> >>>>> You are just showing your TOTAL and UTTER STUPIDITY here. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> That would be mre like what decider gets the Halting Question >>>>>>> right the pathological input? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not, Does the input Halt when run? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Look at the wrong question and of course you get the wrong answer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And repeatedly doing that is just another form of DECEPTION and >>>>>>> LYING. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The QUESTION ask for the mapping of D D -> {Halting, Non-Halting} >>>>>>> >>>>>>> anything else is just a LIE. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> isomorphic to >>>>>>>> mapping from specific_unmarried_man to stopped_beating_wife(YES/NO) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The question ask for the mapping from D,D to Halts(D,D), which >>>>>>>>> exists. >>>>>>>>> Remeber, the question is, and only is: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That is not the question that H(D,D) is being asked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, you continue to lie about that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess you are just incurably stupid. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you still remember the question of the Halting Problem? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> THE REAL ONE >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The same as the specific_unmarried_man >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The logical law of polar questions >>>>>>>> Feb 20, 2015, 11:38:48 AM  sci.lang >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When posed to a man whom has never been married, >>>>>>>> the question: Have you stopped beating your wife? >>>>>>>> Is an incorrect polar question because neither yes nor >>>>>>>> no is a correct answer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does the Machine and Input described by the input Halt when run. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thus, H only gets ivolved when we are CHECKING the answer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (b) Specific unmarried_man to stopped_beating_wife(YES/NO) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (a) and (b) are isomorphic. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Only in that H doesn't exist, as oesn't the man's wife. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> They are both YES/NO questions lacking a correct YES/NO answer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Although there is a mapping from some TM/input pairs to YES/NO >>>>>>>>>>>> there is no mapping from H/D to YES/NO >>>>>>>>>>>> thus the question is incorrect for H/D >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> But the question isn't mapping H/D, it is mapping the Machine >>>>>>>>>>> described by the input (and its input) to if it reaches a >>>>>>>>>>> final state, which has >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> That one half of the mapping. >>>>>>>>>> To be isomorphic >>>>>>>>>> mapping from specific_unmarried_man to >>>>>>>>>> stopped_beating_wife(YES/NO) >>>>>>>>>> we must have mapping from specific TM: H(D,D) to Halts(D,D) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which is just a Red Herring, because we are NOT asking about >>>>>>>>> what H does, but about what its input represents and what H >>>>>>>>> needs to do to be correct. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> an answer, depend on the specifics of the problem, that >>>>>>>>>>> needed to have specifed before you could ever actually ask >>>>>>>>>>> the question. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You are just LYING about what the question actually is. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It now seems to me that you never were lying. >>>>>>>>>> The philosophical foundation of these things is very difficult. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It is when you and others ridiculously disagreed with the dead >>>>>>>>>> obvious totally verified facts of the actual behavior behavior >>>>>>>>>> of H1(D,D) and H(D,D) that gave me sufficient reason to conclude ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========