| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<usdh52$19t1n$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Refutation of the Peter Linz Halting Problem proof 2024-03-05 --partial agreement-- Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 17:04:02 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 44 Message-ID: <usdh52$19t1n$1@dont-email.me> References: <us8shn$7g2d$1@dont-email.me> <us92f0$uvql$4@i2pn2.org> <us931e$8gmr$1@dont-email.me> <usa4rk$10ek4$3@i2pn2.org> <usa5to$gp0j$1@dont-email.me> <usa8lp$10ek5$5@i2pn2.org> <usa9o9$ho7b$1@dont-email.me> <usag21$118jg$1@i2pn2.org> <usanbu$klu7$1@dont-email.me> <usavv8$m3rv$5@dont-email.me> <usb0fh$m7mn$4@dont-email.me> <usbb7s$12dn0$1@i2pn2.org> <usbbtq$rneq$2@dont-email.me> <usbfjn$12dmv$7@i2pn2.org> <usbm60$tg2q$2@dont-email.me> <usbnb6$12dmv$16@i2pn2.org> <usbpb4$u2pm$1@dont-email.me> <usd6aa$150h1$2@i2pn2.org> <usd7im$17ufd$1@dont-email.me> <usdelo$15934$1@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2024 23:04:02 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cbe692f823dc8310f00dd0aaf1f84978"; logging-data="1373239"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19pj9/xsHnmZXHO+QfCBBwN" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:vcdp9usjcWBFK/voZx71Fjgkp8Y= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <usdelo$15934$1@i2pn2.org> Bytes: 3303 On 3/7/2024 4:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 3/7/24 12:20 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/7/2024 1:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 3/6/24 11:11 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 3/7/2024 12:37 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 3/6/24 10:17 PM, olcott wrote: >>> >>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.Hq0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.Hqy ∞ // Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ halts >>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.Hq0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.Hqn // Ĥ applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ does >>>>>> not halt >>>>>> >>>>>> The design of Olcott Machines makes quite easy for Ĥ.H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>>>>> to get its abort criteria. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Which doesn't match the Halting Problem requirements, >>>> >>>> It does match the Halting Problem requirements, when >>>> they are implemented indirectly as "abort criteria". >>>> >>> >>> Which is a different criteria, so you are just admitting that you are >>> using a strawman desception and thus INTENTIONALLY LYING. >>> >>> Somehow you think lies are ok if they help you prove your false >>> statements. >> >> The Linz second ⊢* enables H to compute any damn >> thing as long as this ends up computing halting. >> > > Note quite, it is whatever the algorithm for H generates. > > That exact same algorithm exists in H^.H, so that WILL get the same > answer, and since you logic says it doesn't, that means you are lying > that H^ was built by the specification, or as to what H will actually do. *Already addressed in my reply to you here* We finally know exactly how H1(D,D) derives a different result than H(D,D) -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer