Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!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: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 08:12:43 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <v8vrsb$32fso$5@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> <v8v61f$29aqq$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2024 15:12:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f6826d85dca534e829aa60949a8b0d61";
	logging-data="3227544"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/kskFYcHyGkicXMhlOR27d"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:d25yJnMl+Q8sFudfmIJd8alK5Xk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v8v61f$29aqq$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3876

On 8/7/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-08-04 19:33:36 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> 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
> 
> Conventionally the value 0 is used for "no" (for example, no errors)
> and value 1 for "yes". If there are different "yes" results other

A Conventional halt decider is 1 for halts and 0 for does not halt.
0 also means input has pathological relationship to decider.
In other words 1 means good input and 0 means bad input.

> numbers in addition to 1 can be used. For example, for the question
> "is there anu errors?" the number may identify the error. For a
> partial halt decider the best values are
> -1 = does not halt
> 0 = not determined
> 1 = halts.
> 
> In C the value 0 is interpreted as false and every other number,
> positive or negative, is interpreted as true in every context
> where a boolean value is expected.
> 

I have known that since K&R was the standard.
I met Bjarne Stroustrup we he went around the country
promoting his new C++ language at the local universities.
He was a tee shirt and blue jeans kind of guy.

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