Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: It has always been impossible to define an INPUT that does the
 opposite of its halt decider
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 18:10:02 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <1027pka$qb6d$1@dont-email.me>
References: <1025i6j$afk6$1@dont-email.me> <1026i2q$h686$1@dont-email.me>
 <1026slo$j3rp$6@dont-email.me> <1026ta5$ipgg$1@dont-email.me>
 <1026ukn$k2tr$1@dont-email.me> <1026uuj$ipgg$2@dont-email.me>
 <1026vqt$kb6a$1@dont-email.me> <102703a$kcea$1@dont-email.me>
 <10270q6$ki5i$1@dont-email.me> <102715d$ipgg$3@dont-email.me>
 <10271sq$ki5i$2@dont-email.me> <10272c7$ipgg$4@dont-email.me>
 <10272o6$kt3u$1@dont-email.me> <10273h4$ipgg$6@dont-email.me>
 <102745p$lajf$1@dont-email.me> <10274cs$ipgg$7@dont-email.me>
 <10274ln$ldq3$1@dont-email.me> <102754h$ipgg$8@dont-email.me>
 <10275v1$lo22$1@dont-email.me> <102768b$ipgg$9@dont-email.me>
 <10276fd$lo22$2@dont-email.me> <10276pf$ipgg$10@dont-email.me>
 <10277j5$m30d$1@dont-email.me> <10278ai$ipgg$11@dont-email.me>
 <10279ha$mm0d$2@dont-email.me> <1027a5b$ipgg$12@dont-email.me>
 <1027c5c$nc63$2@dont-email.me> <1027dpf$ipgg$14@dont-email.me>
 <1027e1s$npoo$2@dont-email.me> <1027e6c$ipgg$16@dont-email.me>
 <1027gpq$ofnf$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 01:10:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="668213ca1180824494e01b33326cf4e0";
	logging-data="863437"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18+j4z+HJ9LTgtHChKYP9Tl"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SX+GTYn74/Ek1mdXvIHGe5hu6/0=
In-Reply-To: <1027gpq$ofnf$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250609-4, 6/9/2025), Outbound message

On 6/9/2025 3:39 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> 
> On 09/06/2025 20:54, dbush wrote:
>>> If you would just be honest about the fact that you're not working on 
>>> the halting problem, people would stop bothering
>>> you.
> Well, I doubt if he'll ever do that, but we could stop bothering him 
> anyway. You'd be amazed at how much time you save. :-)
> 

I have refuted the halting problem proofs the
exact same way that ZFC refuted Russell's Paradox.

The halting problem proof crucially depends on defining
an *INPUT* that does the opposite of whatever value its
corresponding halt decider returns. It is not possible
to define such an *INPUT*.

int main()
{
   DDD(); // Is not an *INPUT* to the HHH(DDD)
}        // that this DDD calls.

When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn

The computation that embedded_H is embedded within
is not an *INPUT* to embedded_H.

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer