Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: HHH decides a non-trivial semantic property of its input
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 10:17:09 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <v91rdl$3qfbb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v8o47a$3ml4$1@dont-email.me> <v8q19o$iqvb$1@dont-email.me> <g7idnfxFzNYAIS37nZ2dnZfqlJydnZ2d@giganews.com> <v8qkv3$n73l$1@dont-email.me> <4-qdnbRw1Jw-Si37nZ2dnZfqlJwAAAAA@giganews.com> <v8v6d5$29evi$1@dont-email.me> <v8vsha$32fso$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2024 09:17:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7ca8cc5ca66551310006596dadbb32e6";
	logging-data="4013419"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19vuLFQaNIo9iP7F539/skt"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xKNsjgI9QQQ1XE4uilpXqAsyuJM=
Bytes: 3446

On 2024-08-07 13:23:54 +0000, olcott said:

> On 8/7/2024 2:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-08-05 13:46:11 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 8/5/2024 8:44 AM, Python wrote:
>>>> Le 05/08/2024 à 13:50, olcott a écrit :
>>>>> On 8/5/2024 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-08-04 14:46:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That is called a "partial halt decider". The set of requirements is
>>>>>> a subset of the requirements for "halt decider" but still require
>>>>>> that the answer is not "halts" if the input does not halt and that
>>>>>> the answer is not "does not halt" if the input halts. The difference
>>>>>> is that a "halt decider" is required to give one of these answers
>>>>>> for every input but a "partial halt decider" is not.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For every computation there is a partial halt decider that answers it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I call it a halting decidability decider.
>>>>> 1=input halts
>>>>> 0=input does not halt or has pathological relationship with its decider
>>>> 
>>>> So it is NOT an halt decider. Case closed. You've lost your time
>>>> for years, and made a lot of people lose their time too.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> It refutes Rice
>> 
>> No, it does not. Nothing is refuted as long as you have not proven anything.
>> 
> 
> 1 = halts = good input = decidable
> 0 = (not halts or pathological) = bad input = not decidable as halting
> HHH decides a non-trivial semantic property of its input.

Your "not decidable as halting" is not a property of input. Another
partial decider may be able to determine that the input is halting
and therefore decidable as halting.

-- 
Mikko