Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Halting Problem is wrong two different ways --very stupid
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 21:09:35 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <v3r5ov$1at2m$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v3j20v$3gm10$2@dont-email.me>
 <J_CdnTaA96jxpcD7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87h6eamkgf.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <v3kcdj$3stk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3kjs9$3u7ng$1@dont-email.me> <v3l16f$5d3$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3mj84$bq2d$1@dont-email.me> <v3njiv$gatu$9@dont-email.me>
 <v3og5t$328ec$9@i2pn2.org> <v3oh4q$pi6u$2@dont-email.me>
 <v3ohim$jthg$3@dont-email.me> <v3ohql$pi6u$4@dont-email.me>
 <v3q5pt$q84p$2@dont-email.me> <v3q63u$122u1$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3qb1a$34b9u$14@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 04:09:36 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4cb2a3366a4bdb85a28904f6e3988fec";
	logging-data="1406038"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Nw6nabD5OOeQablei+pXG"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:B0ZJIF5oa8csOvEK9iUmeokX3w8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v3qb1a$34b9u$14@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 3125

On 6/5/2024 1:33 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:09:18 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 6/5/2024 12:03 PM, John Smith wrote:
>>> On 5/06/24 04:16, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/4/2024 9:12 PM, John Smith wrote:
>>>>> On 5/06/24 04:05, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> (6) Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this question?
>> Let's ask Carol. If she says “yes”, she's saying that “no” is the
>> correct answer for her, so “yes” is incorrect. If she says “no”, she's
>> saying that she cannot correctly answer “no”, which is her answer. We
>> are assuming for this and all subsequent questions that the only
>> acceptable answers are “yes” and “no”, and in this case, both answers
>> are incorrect. Carol cannot answer the question correctly. Now let's ask
>> Dave. He says “no”, and he is correct because Carol cannot correctly
>> answer “no”. So (6) is subjective because it is a consistent,
>> satisfiable specification for some agent (anyone other than Carol), and
>> an inconsistent, unsatisfiable specification for some agent (Carol).

> But that's like running a different machine. That's not interesting.
> We wanted to see a machine that can answer ALL questions. 

To expect a correct answer to an incorrect question has
always been very stupid.

> This one was
> specifically constructed to be unanswerable by this machine. The
> equivalent translation would be "Can YOU answer No?".
> 


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer