Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Working_out_the_details_of_the_steps_of_=C4=A4=2EH_?=
 =?UTF-8?B?4p+oxKTin6kg4p+oxKTin6kgPMSkPiDiiqIqIMSkLkhxbg==?=
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 20:58:03 -0800
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <usgq8r$18p2c$8@i2pn2.org>
References: <usd5ot$a7f$1@reader1.panix.com> <usesk9$1lk0a$1@dont-email.me>
 <usfclk$1p8cg$2@dont-email.me> <MmIGN.375143$vFZa.293337@fx13.iad>
 <usfkcd$1rdpp$2@dont-email.me> <9YIGN.461274$c3Ea.142857@fx10.iad>
 <usfo8t$1s1nb$4@dont-email.me> <usfsfn$18eqv$4@i2pn2.org>
 <usg097$1trf3$1@dont-email.me> <usg1kc$18jtf$1@i2pn2.org>
 <usg3v4$1uh5a$1@dont-email.me> <usg70f$18p2b$1@i2pn2.org>
 <usgac0$1vlpm$1@dont-email.me> <usgddc$18p2c$1@i2pn2.org>
 <usgfhh$20e93$1@dont-email.me> <usggq7$18p2c$2@i2pn2.org>
 <usgham$20e93$3@dont-email.me> <usgikc$18p2b$3@i2pn2.org>
 <usgjo6$24sk4$1@dont-email.me> <usglon$18p2c$4@i2pn2.org>
 <usgo3a$25ivo$1@dont-email.me> <usgoq8$18p2c$6@i2pn2.org>
 <usgpgn$25ivo$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2024 04:58:04 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1336396"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <usgpgn$25ivo$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 4226
Lines: 74

On 3/8/24 8:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/8/2024 10:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 3/8/24 8:20 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/8/2024 9:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 3/8/24 7:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> Ĥ.H computes the mapping from ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ <Ĥ> to Ĥ.Hqn
>>>>> therefore
>>>>> H computes the mapping from ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ <H> to H.qy
>>>>>
>>>>> I still don't know the detailed steps of how
>>>>> H computes the mapping from ⟨H⟩ ⟨H⟩ <H> to H.qy
>>>>> YET WE CAN SEE THAT IT IS CORRECT
>>>>
>>>> No, you see that you have a set of results that makes
>>>
>>> Every H needs a criteria to use whether it is contradicted
>>> or not. When it is not contradicted this same criteria
>>> correctly decides halting for its input.
>>>
>>> When H is contradicted it provides a consistent way
>>> that H can provide the wrong answer.
>>
>> But if you admit that it will get a wrong answer, how can you claim it 
>> is a correct Halt Decider, which means it always gets the Right answer.
>>
> 
> When the input data gets the wrong answer this allows the
> actual decider to get the right answer.

But the algorith at H^.H IS an instanc eof the decide,r, and must get 
the answer right.

You are just admitting to being a STUPID LIAR.

> 
>> You are just admitting that you are lying about refuting the proof 
>> that we can not make an always correct Halt Decider.
>>
>> You don't get to claim to be right, when the machine gives the wrong 
>> answer.
>>
>>>
>>> You already know that Ĥ.H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ must be aborted by Ĥ.H
>>> or it will never halt.
>>>
>>> When every H has the same way to say that, then when it is
>>> contradicted it has something to say and when it is not
>>> contradicted this is the correct halt status of its input.
>>>
>>
>> No, if ANY copy of H gives the wrong answer to some input, then H is 
>> not a Halt Decider.
> 
> When the input data gets the wrong answer this allows the
> actual decider to get the right answer.

And thus you admit that H is WRONG, as all copies of it are the ACTUAL 
DECIDER.

That is the nature of a Computation.

ANY instance of the algorithm applied to its input must get the same 
answer for the same data and to be correct must match the mapping that 
it is supposed to derive.

You are just proving you don't understand the definition of the field, 
but claim to be following them by saying you are working on the Halting 
Problem.

> 
>>
>> Just saying "something" when stuck, doesn't make it correct.
>>
>