Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<d68e2ec9f1b0872f625244b14c4882a2e3782859@i2pn2.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!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, 11 Aug 2024 13:06:09 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <d68e2ec9f1b0872f625244b14c4882a2e3782859@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> <v8v61f$29aqq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8vrsb$32fso$5@dont-email.me> <v91r57$3qct4$1@dont-email.me>
 <v92gpl$p1$4@dont-email.me> <v94lkb$lh2p$1@dont-email.me>
 <v956lm$o1gt$3@dont-email.me> <v977s1$guti$1@dont-email.me>
 <v97he3$ilah$1@dont-email.me> <v99lf7$25pkm$1@dont-email.me>
 <v9a7qm$2923f$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2024 17:06:09 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2215994"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <v9a7qm$2923f$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2166
Lines: 27

On 8/11/24 7:37 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 8/11/2024 1:24 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-08-10 11:03:31 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>>
>>> 1=halts
>>> 0=does not halt or pathological relationship to decider
>>
>> Which does not use the stipulation and therefore does not demonstrate
>> its usefulńess.
>>
>> That a computation has a pathological relationship to some decider
>> does not prevent another partial haltdecider from determinig whther
>> it halts.
>>
> 
> void DDD()
> {
>    HHH(DDD);
>    return;
> }
> 
> A pathological relationship to this decider <is>
> a non-trivial semantic property of this input.
> 

Nope, because it depends on the decider as well as the input, and thus 
is NOT a property of JUST the input.