Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 11:06:01 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <vc8ot9$2o1f3$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vc6qlc$275or$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 10:06:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="78d4dd46df227334361897bc1d60d56f";
	logging-data="2885091"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UpLqwLilH0lnISpFJNY2r"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZFN3eSqKBdnfRacsKrQFpjmRyVg=
Bytes: 1615

On 2024-09-15 14:23:38 +0000, olcott said:

> Rebutting the Sipser Halting Problem Proof
> D(D) correctly reports its own halt status
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364302709_Rebutting_the_Sipser_Halting_Problem_Proof 
> 

That article does not prove its claim and therefore does not constiture
a refutation of anything.

The text agreed by Sipser is shown twice: first in the beginnig of
the article and again in the beginnig of the Appendix.

There are two execution traces: one on pare 3, another in the Appendix.
The relation between them is not explained. More generally, the roloe
or the purpose of the Appendix is not clear.

-- 
Mikko