Path: ...!news.nobody.at!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: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) --- Truth
 Itself is not Broken.
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 22:55:24 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <v4j3bd$3a0ot$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v45tec$4q15$1@dont-email.me> <v4dbmf$3qbnc$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v4dcd6$1sioe$3@dont-email.me> <v4df0h$3qbnd$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4dhf5$1tsdf$2@dont-email.me> <v4dja1$3qbnd$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v4djhf$1tsdf$6@dont-email.me> <v4dk7b$3qbnc$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v4dl3b$225kb$1@dont-email.me> <v4dn5u$3qbnd$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v4dop4$22o4a$2@dont-email.me> <v4dq07$3qbnc$12@i2pn2.org>
 <v4dqq0$2353n$1@dont-email.me> <v4el9m$3rsd6$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v4f3ec$2akmh$2@dont-email.me> <v4g65a$3tn6q$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4g6vr$2ic0g$1@dont-email.me> <v4gc0b$3tn6r$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v4gcjc$2msea$1@dont-email.me> <v4geab$3tn6r$8@i2pn2.org>
 <v4gg0s$2nim8$2@dont-email.me> <v4ha63$3v16r$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v4hfq9$2sdqr$5@dont-email.me> <v4ijlc$kqh$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4injg$348ha$1@dont-email.me> <v4iraj$kqh$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v4isva$392jh$2@dont-email.me> <v4itis$kqh$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v4iutm$39bc0$1@dont-email.me> <v4ivig$kqh$9@i2pn2.org>
 <v4ivti$39gh7$2@dont-email.me> <v4j28d$kqh$10@i2pn2.org>
 <v4j2ck$39ub0$1@dont-email.me> <v4j2u4$kqh$13@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 05:55:25 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="020d44455d70acf7231aebb6a85d124b";
	logging-data="3474205"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18PfNGcbe5B7D+bCtwI0HAN"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:49WHxi3pmmnqzs3MYqh+VaHyAJM=
In-Reply-To: <v4j2u4$kqh$13@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 7335

On 6/14/2024 10:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 6/14/24 11:39 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 6/14/2024 10:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 6/14/24 10:56 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 6/14/2024 9:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 6/14/24 10:39 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/14/2024 9:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 10:06 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/14/2024 8:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 8:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/2024 6:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 9:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/2024 6:39 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 12:13 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it is more than that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H cannot even be asked the question:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does D(D) halt?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, you just don't understand the proper meaning of "ask" 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when applied to a deterministic entity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> When H and D have a pathological relationship to each
>>>>>>>>>>>> other then H(D,D) is not being asked about the behavior
>>>>>>>>>>>> of D(D). H1(D,D) has no such pathological relationship
>>>>>>>>>>>> thus D correctly simulated by H1 is the behavior of D(D).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> OF course it is. The nature of the input doesn't affet the 
>>>>>>>>>>> form of the question that H is supposed to answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The textbook asks the question.
>>>>>>>>>> The data cannot possibly do that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the data doesn't need to do it, as the program 
>>>>>>>>> specifictions define it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Now, if H was supposed to be a "Universal Problem Decider", 
>>>>>>>>> then we would need to somehow "encode" the goal of H 
>>>>>>>>> determining that a correct (and complete) simulation of its 
>>>>>>>>> input would need to reach a final state, but I see no issue 
>>>>>>>>> with defining a way to encode that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You already said that H cannot possibly map its
>>>>>>>>>> input to the behavior of D(D).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right, it is impossible for H to itself compute that behavior 
>>>>>>>>> and give an answer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That doesn't mean we can't encode the question.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We need to stay focused on this one single point until you
>>>>>>>>>> fully get it. Unlike the other two respondents you do have
>>>>>>>>>> the capacity to understand this.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You keep expecting H to read your computer science
>>>>>>>>>> textbooks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No, I expect its PROGRAMMER to have done that, which clearly 
>>>>>>>>> you haven't done.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Programs don't read their requirements, the perform the actions 
>>>>>>>>> they were programmed to do, and if the program is correct, it 
>>>>>>>>> will get the right answer. If it doesn't get the right answer, 
>>>>>>>>> then the programmer erred in saying it meet the requirements.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am only going to talk to you in the one thread about
>>>>>>>> this, it is too difficult material to understand outside
>>>>>>>> of a single chain of thought.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What, you can't keep the different topic straight?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is probably too difficult for anyone to understand outside
>>>>>> of a single thread of thought. It has taken me twenty years
>>>>>> of rehashing the same material until I gradually got deeper
>>>>>> and deeper insights.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *THIS IS WHAT HAS KEPT ME GOING FOR TWENTY YEARS*
>>>>>> The key aspect of all of this is that if the halting problem is
>>>>>> correct then truth itself is fundamentally broken. Since truth
>>>>>> itself cannot possibly be fundamentally broken it must be
>>>>>> fallible human understanding of truth that is actually broken.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe YOUR idea of truth is broken, but not truth itself.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The really weird (and very good) part of this is that your
>>>> understanding of these things beats at least half of the
>>>> experts in truthmaker theory. I have looked at a dozen papers.
>>>>
>>>> Explain how an expression of language can be true when
>>>> literally no thing makes it true. This is the one that half
>>>> of the experts are totally clueless about.
>>>>
>>>> Cats are animals is made true by its definition.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because the "thing" that makes it true is OUTSIDE the system of 
>>> interest, 
>>
>> THAT IS NOT NO THING, bzzztt Wrong Answer !!!
>>
> 
> But if you consider it a thing, that means that your logic system FAILS 
> by the same problem that killed Naive Set Theory, and in fact, can shpw 
> that ANYTHING is true.
> 

bzzzTT WRONG ANSWER. Prove there is a centillion ton rainbow colored 
elephant in my living room right now.

> So, I guess we know how good your logic system is.
> 
> All your crasy ideas are true, because everything is true, we can even 
> PROVE that there was wholesale election interfearance with massive fraud.
> 
> This just goes to your not understand how the infinite works.

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