Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <abc@def.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Defining a correct halting decidability decider
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2024 16:05:48 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <v8oqfc$8767$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v8o47a$3ml4$1@dont-email.me>
 <0ec454016dab6f6d6dd5580f5d0eea49569293d8@i2pn2.org>
 <v8oigl$6kik$1@dont-email.me>
 <6ec9812649b0f4a042edd1e9a1c14b93e7b9a16b@i2pn2.org>
 <v8ol2g$74lk$1@dont-email.me>
 <476303ac27d94a26dd563468f0ce10407e60034c@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2024 23:05:49 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="903796c801119a1f2fd86200a8e93bf1";
	logging-data="269511"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19HUP7L4XWZzu2MF4VyEJmg"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:c9dbi7cNKgy8X0xmbH9JmlZtIqE=
In-Reply-To: <476303ac27d94a26dd563468f0ce10407e60034c@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3097

On 8/4/2024 3:14 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/4/24 3:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/4/2024 2:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/4/24 2:49 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/4/2024 1:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/4/24 10:46 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> When we define an input that does the opposite of whatever
>>>>>> value that its halt decider reports there is a way for the
>>>>>> halt decider to report correctly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int DD()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>    return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> int main()
>>>>>> {
>>>>>>    HHH(DD);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HHH returns false indicating that it cannot
>>>>>> correctly determine that its input halts.
>>>>>> True would mean that its input halts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But false indicates that the input does not halt, but it does.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I made a mistake that I corrected on a forum that allows
>>>> editing: *Defining a correct halting decidability decider*
>>>> 1=input does halt
>>>> 0=input cannot be decided to halt
>>>
>>> And thus, not a halt decider.
>>>
>>> Sorry, you are just showing your ignorance.
>>>
>>> And, the problem is that a given DD *CAN* be decided about halting, 
>>> just not by HHH, so "can not be decided" is not a correct answer. 
>>
>> A single universal decider can correctly determine whether
>> or not an input could possibly be denial-of-service-attack.
>> 0=yes does not halt or pathological self-reference
>> 1=no  halts
>>
>>
> 
> Which isn't halt deciding, so you are just admitting you have been lying 
> about working on the Halting Problem.
> 

It does seem to refute Rice.

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