Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!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
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 11:07:44 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 241
Message-ID: <v3smsg$1iedv$4@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$2@dont-email.me>
 <v3p6jq$sg73$3@dont-email.me> <v3pr0p$1003g$3@dont-email.me>
 <v3qc3c$1305p$1@dont-email.me> <v3qpp1$15div$1@dont-email.me>
 <v3smh1$1ihop$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2024 18:07:45 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4cb2a3366a4bdb85a28904f6e3988fec";
	logging-data="1653183"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18JREoUPmuBg/r7MxvENfo4"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1ndRwklTHV3pohR/HIVHgxmYkwQ=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v3smh1$1ihop$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 12124

On 6/6/2024 11:01 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 06.jun.2024 om 00:44 schreef olcott:
>> On 6/5/2024 1:51 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 05.jun.2024 om 15:59 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/5/2024 3:11 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 05.jun.2024 om 04:05 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 8:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/4/24 1:40 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/4/2024 3:28 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-03 18:14:39 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/3/2024 9:27 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-03 12:20:01 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/3/2024 4:42 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO's D(D) halts, as illustrated in various traces that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been posted here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO's H(D,D) returns 0 : [NOT halting] also as illustrated 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in various traces.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. exactly as the Linz proof claims.  PO has 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acknowledged both these
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results.  Same for the HH/DD variants.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You might imagine that's the end of the matter - PO 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failed.  :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's right, but PO just carries on anyway!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has quite explicitly stated that false (0) is the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct result for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(D,D) "even though D(D) halts".  I am mystified why anyone 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> continues to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss the matter until he equally explicitly repudiates 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that claim.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Deciders only compute the mapping *from their inputs* to 
>>>>>>>>>>>> their own
>>>>>>>>>>>> accept or reject state.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That does not restrict what a problem statement can specify.
>>>>>>>>>>> If the computed mapping differs from the specified one the
>>>>>>>>>>> decider does not solve the problem.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
>>>>>>>>>> sum(2,3) cannot return the sum of 5 + 6.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That does not restrict what a problem statement can specify.
>>>>>>>>> If the mapping computed by sum differs from the specified one
>>>>>>>>> the program sum does not solve the problem.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/3/2024 9:53 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>  > Because you keep on mentioning about DD Halting,
>>>>>>>>  > which IS about the direct execution of DD
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only when one contradicts the definition of a decider that must
>>>>>>>> compute the mapping FROM ITS INPUTS BASED ON THE ACTUAL BEHAVIOR
>>>>>>>> OF THESE INPUTS (as measured by DD correctly simulated by HH).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But strings don't HAVE "Behavior", they only represent things 
>>>>>>> that do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Turing Machine descriptions specify behavior to UTMs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And, for a Halt decider, that thing they represent is the 
>>>>>>> program, whose direct execution specifies the proper behavior of 
>>>>>>> the input.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The DEFINITON IS NOT  "as measured by DD correctly simulated by 
>>>>>>> HH", as deciders, by their definiton, are trying to compute the 
>>>>>>> mapping of their input according to a defined function, which is 
>>>>>>> a function of just that input. Since that function doesn't know 
>>>>>>> which "H' is going to try to decide on it, it can't change its 
>>>>>>> answer based on which H we ask.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proper Deciders can not be asked "Subjective" questions, unless 
>>>>>>> we SPECIFICALLY define the mapping to include the decider as one 
>>>>>>> of the inputs, and at that point, the question actually ceases to 
>>>>>>> be subjective, as it becomes, what should THAT H say about this 
>>>>>>> input, which is back to an objective agian (since machines are 
>>>>>>> deterministic, so the definition of H tells us what H will answer 
>>>>>>> to that question).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When we go ahead and contradict this definition then the
>>>>>>>> *HALTING PROBLEM IS STILL WRONG IN A DIFFERENT WAY*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, YOU are wrong, because you
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When D is defined to do the opposite of whatever yes/no
>>>>>>>> an answer that H provides then the counter-example input
>>>>>>>> is precisely isomorphic to the question:
>>>>>>>> Is this sentence: "This sentence is not true." true or false?
>>>>>>>> Thus that question and the HP question are both incorrect
>>>>>>>> because both yes and no are the wrong answer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nope, Just shows how small your mind is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proven elsewhere.,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The theory of computation may be ignorant of the details of
>>>>>>>> how the context of who is asked a question changes the meaning
>>>>>>>> of this question, none-the-less this cannot be ignored.
>>>>>>>> It is and remains incorrect for the theory of computation
>>>>>>>> to ignore this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the question it asks is an OBJECTIVE question that doesn't 
>>>>>>> depend on who it is asked of.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When H is asked about the behavior of a Machine that is programmed
>>>>>> to do the opposite of whatever it says then the context that it is H
>>>>>> that is being asked is an inherent aspect of the meaning of this
>>>>>> question and cannot be correctly ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that has nothing to do with your simulation result. 
>>>>
>>>> Notice the subject line of this thread.
>>>> That HH is being asked an incorrect question is the second
>>>> way that the Halting Problem is wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> Your simulation does not even reach the part that contradict its 
>>>>> result.
>>>>> Your decider even diagnoses programs as non-halting when they do 
>>>>> not contradict the result of the decider, as in:
>>>>>
>>>>>         typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function in C
>>>>>
>>>>>         int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>>>>>
>>>>>         int main()
>>>>>         {
>>>>>           H(main, 0);
>>>>>         }
>>>>>
>>>>> It is clear that main does not programmed to do the opposite of 
>>>>> what H says.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *I was surprised that this worked correctly: here are the details*
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>    Output("Input_Halts = ", HH(main,(ptr)0));
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>>>>   address   address   data      code       language
>>>>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
>>>> [00001e42][00103375][00000000] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
>>>> [00001e43][00103375][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00001e45][00103371][00000000] 6a00       push +00
>>>> [00001e47][0010336d][00001e42] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 ; push main
>>>> [00001e4c][00103369][00001e51] e831f5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH
>>>> New slave_stack at:103419
>>>>
>>>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:113421
>>>> [00001e42][0011340d][00113411] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
>>>> [00001e43][0011340d][00113411] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
>>>> [00001e45][00113409][00000000] 6a00       push +00
>>>> [00001e47][00113405][00001e42] 68421e0000 push 00001e42 ; push main
>>>> [00001e4c][00113401][00001e51] e831f5ffff call 00001382 ; call HH
>>>> New slave_stack at:14de41
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========