Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.quux.org!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input
 to HHH(DD)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 11:13:57 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <1276edeb9893085c59b02bbbd59fe2c64011736b@i2pn2.org>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me>
	<87msbmeo3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjcge$27753$2@dont-email.me>
	<vvjeqf$28555$1@dont-email.me> <vvjffg$28g5i$1@dont-email.me>
	<875xiaejzg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjgt1$28g5i$5@dont-email.me>
	<87jz6qczja.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vvjotc$28g5i$12@dont-email.me>
	<vvnh9u$3hd96$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
	<vvno4e$3in62$2@dont-email.me> <vvo71c$rlt$1@news.muc.de>
	<PlNTP.270466$lZjd.128570@fx05.ams4> <vvochv$15td$2@news.muc.de>
	<vvodn5$3na6l$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 11:13:57 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4063929"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0

Am Sat, 10 May 2025 15:42:13 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/10/2025 3:22 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

>> OK, then, give the page and line numbers from Turing's 1936 paper where
>> this alleged mistake was made.  I would be surprised indeed if you'd
>> even looked at Turing's paper, far less understood it.  Yet you're
>> ready to denigrate his work.
>> Perhaps it is time for you to withdraw these uncalled for insinuations.
>> 
> It is the whole gist of the entire idea of the halting problem proof
> that is wrongheaded.
> (1) It is anchored in the false assumption that an input to a
> termination analyzer can actually do this opposite of whatever value
> that this analyzer returns. No one ever notices that this "do the
> opposite" code is unreachable.
The simulated DDD doesn't matter. HHH returns to DDD, and DDD then does
the opposite.

> (2) It expects a self-contradictory (thus incorrect)
> question to have a correct answer.
Whether a program halts is not contradictory.

> Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this (yes/no) question?
> When the context of who is asked is understood to be an aspect of the
> full meaning of the question then the question posed to Carol is
> incorrect because both yes and no are the wrong answer.
Yes, HHH cannot answer correctly.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.