Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) --- Dogma Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 18:27:05 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 64 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 01:27:06 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="52f855e26d0a069f32049d753a1d455d"; logging-data="3569201"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX194H42/5YIo0qWbanzGjFoI" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:aqwVe72Ig0r6WZqOD2LNjEG3qA8= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4373 On 6/21/2024 4:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 6/21/24 5:25 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 6/21/2024 4:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 6/21/24 4:52 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 6/21/2024 3:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 6/21/24 3:45 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 6/21/2024 2:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/21/24 3:19 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> int sum(int x, int y){ return x + y; } >>>>>>>> When this program is asked: sum(3,4) this maps to 7. >>>>>>>> When this program is asked: sum(5,6) this DOES NOT map to 7. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Right. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When H is asked H(D,D) this maps to D correctly simulated by H. >>>>>>>> When H is asked H(D,D) this DOES NOT map to behavior that halts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nope. H(M,d) is DEFINED (if it is correct) to determine if M(d) >>>>>>> will Halt. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> If one "defines" that the input to H(D,D) maps to the behavior >>>>>> of D(D) yet cannot show this because it does not actually >>>>>> map to that behavior *THEN THE DEFINITION IS SIMPLY WRONG* >>>>> >>>>> But we CAN show that it maps to the behavior of D(D) (at least when >>>>> the representation of D includes the H that is giving the 0 answer) >>>>> by just runnig it and seeing what it does. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No you cannot show that the mapping for the input to >>>> H(D,D) maps to the behavior of D(D). >>> >>> The DEFINITION of a Halt Decider gives what H is SUPPOSED to do, if >>> it is one. >>> >>> You claim it is a correct Halt decider >>> >> >> When we do not simply make false assumptions about the >> behavior that the input to H(D,D) specifies: >>    That the call from D correctly simulated by H to H(D,D) returns > > What "False Assumption"? > > You just are ignorant of the DEFINTION of the problem. > *DOGMA DOES NOT COUNT AS SUPPORTING REASONING* *DOGMA DOES NOT COUNT AS SUPPORTING REASONING* *DOGMA DOES NOT COUNT AS SUPPORTING REASONING* To "define" that the call from the D correctly simulated by H to H(D,D) returns when the actual facts prove that this call *DOES NOT RETURN* is ultimately unreasonable because *THERE IS NO REASONING* that supports this. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer