Path: nntp.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem
 Proof
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:13:43 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <eed26ffea811a639a76d0184321c57eafba746cd@i2pn2.org>
References: <105ht1n$36s20$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2025 11:19:13 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1439890"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <105ht1n$36s20$1@dont-email.me>

On 7/20/25 12:58 AM, olcott wrote:
> Title: A Structural Analysis of the Standard Halting Problem Proof
> 
> Author: PL Olcott
> 
> Abstract:
> This paper presents a formal critique of the standard proof of the 
> undecidability of the Halting Problem. While we do not dispute the 
> conclusion that the Halting Problem is undecidable, we argue that the 
> conventional proof fails to establish this conclusion due to a 
> fundamental misapplication of Turing machine semantics. Specifically, we 
> show that the contradiction used in the proof arises from conflating the 
> behavior of encoded simulations with direct execution, and from making 
> assumptions about a decider's domain that do not hold under a rigorous 
> model of computation.
> 
> 

Your problem is you don't understand the meaning of the words you are using.

You are starting with an incorrect assumption that a "Correct 
Simulation" can possible show behavior that is not in the direct 
exectuion of the machine, but that is IMPOSSIBLE, as the DEFINITION of 
"Correct Simulation" is that it reveals exactly the same behavior as the 
direct execution of the machine.

You talk about the "misapplication of Turing Machine Semantics", but you 
have shown that you don't understand what those are,

Sorry, your abstract just reveals that you don't know what you are 
talking about.