Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Defining a correct halting decidability decider
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:05:49 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <35c5358982b75ccc36bc041f980dd152f1b5c6a3@i2pn2.org>
References: <v8o47a$3ml4$1@dont-email.me>
 <0ec454016dab6f6d6dd5580f5d0eea49569293d8@i2pn2.org>
 <v8oigl$6kik$1@dont-email.me>
 <6ec9812649b0f4a042edd1e9a1c14b93e7b9a16b@i2pn2.org>
 <v8ol2g$74lk$1@dont-email.me>
 <476303ac27d94a26dd563468f0ce10407e60034c@i2pn2.org>
 <v8oqfc$8767$1@dont-email.me>
 <ce9b3873fa013760b85c7f73e59456b6f2f0edbe@i2pn2.org>
 <v8otj0$8oip$1@dont-email.me>
 <5ea40e29a4d8e4014f485fdfda743b95148a961a@i2pn2.org>
 <v8ouh4$905l$1@dont-email.me>
 <7f796739dcafa335aff88a52af5e458d1253625b@i2pn2.org>
 <v8p10u$9ebu$1@dont-email.me>
 <de071bb436f1e79bc9645b5abbb1bea182d9f3e0@i2pn2.org>
 <v8p36o$9pm8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 00:05:49 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1459494"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v8p36o$9pm8$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 5651
Lines: 120

On 8/4/24 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/4/2024 6:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 8/4/24 6:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 8/4/2024 5:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 8/4/24 6:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 8/4/2024 5:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/4/24 5:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/4/2024 4:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/4/24 5:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/2024 3:14 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/24 3:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/2024 2:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/24 2:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/2024 1:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/4/24 10:46 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When we define an input that does the opposite of whatever
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> value that its halt decider reports there is a way for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halt decider to report correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH returns false indicating that it cannot
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly determine that its input halts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True would mean that its input halts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But false indicates that the input does not halt, but it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I made a mistake that I corrected on a forum that allows
>>>>>>>>>>>>> editing: *Defining a correct halting decidability decider*
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1=input does halt
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0=input cannot be decided to halt
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus, not a halt decider.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, you are just showing your ignorance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And, the problem is that a given DD *CAN* be decided about 
>>>>>>>>>>>> halting, just not by HHH, so "can not be decided" is not a 
>>>>>>>>>>>> correct answer. 
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A single universal decider can correctly determine whether
>>>>>>>>>>> or not an input could possibly be denial-of-service-attack.
>>>>>>>>>>> 0=yes does not halt or pathological self-reference
>>>>>>>>>>> 1=no  halts
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Which isn't halt deciding, so you are just admitting you have 
>>>>>>>>>> been lying about working on the Halting Problem.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It does seem to refute Rice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope, because your criteria in not a semantic property of the 
>>>>>>>> INPUT (or it is trivial, as 0 is always a correct answer).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is only allowed to answer 0 when when
>>>>>>> (a) The input does not halt
>>>>>>> (b) The input has a pathological relationship with the decider.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which means it is not a property of the INPUT, but the input and 
>>>>>> the decider.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a property of the input.
>>>>> (a) The input does
>>>>> (b) The input has
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But not of JUST the input.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is a semantic property of the input.
>>> I don't care if you lie about it.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, because it depends on the decider.
>>
> 
> (b) Cannot possibly exist unless it is a property
> of the input.
> 
> 

Then it can not exist, becuase it depends on more than the input.


You are just proving your utter stupidity.

You just don't know what you are talking about.

Sorry, but you are just proving how STUPID you are and that you don't 
care about what is true, only what can you do to make you point seems 
reasonable.


You are just as bad as the election deniers and the climate change 
deniers, and are just validating their methods.

As such, you are a menacy to society, and helping to cause the damage 
you claim to be fighting,

That is, or course, just one of the methods used by your father and mentor.