Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_A_simulating_halt_decider_applied_to_the_The_Peter_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Linz_Turing_Machine_description_=E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9_--_key_d?= =?UTF-8?Q?etails?= Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 13:23:15 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 17:23:15 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2980066"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 3623 Lines: 45 On 6/2/24 9:07 AM, olcott wrote: > On 6/2/2024 2:36 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-06-01 14:37:01 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 6/1/2024 2:52 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-05-31 15:35:18 +0000, olcott said: >>> >>>>> >>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞ >>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn >>>> >>>> Of those two lines one is false. >>>> As embedded_H is a copy of H both lines imply that H is not a halt >>>> decider. >>>> >>>>> *Formalizing the Linz Proof structure* >>>>> ∃H  ∈ Turing_Machines >>>>> ∀x  ∈ Turing_Machine_Descriptions >>>>> ∀y  ∈ Finite_Strings >>>>> such that H(x,y) = Halts(x,y) >>>> >>>> As already noted, the above is not a part of a proof structure. >>>> >>> >>> Unless and until you provide reasoning to back that up it counts >>> as if you said nothing about it. >> >> If there are no more questions about the details of the reasoning >> we may assume that the presiented reasoning is sufficieant. >> > > The above the structure of his proof your empty assertion utterly > bereft of any supporting (EAUBoaSR)) reasoning counts for zilch. > > Linz claims that of every Turing Machine there are none that solve the > halting problem. > > ∃!H  ∈ Turing_Machines  (What Richard was saying) > would say that there does not exist exactly one Turing Machine that > solves the halting problem thus fails if there are more than one. > I never said that, which prove you to be a LILAR. That yo might think I said that just shows that you are an IDIOT.