Path: ...!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: The actual truth is that ... industry standard stipulative definitions
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 11:47:23 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <vevrmr$3q8j1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me> <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me> <vedibm$4891$2@dont-email.me> <72315c1456c399b2121b3fffe90b933be73e39b6@i2pn2.org> <vee6s1$7l0f$1@dont-email.me> <1180775691cf24be4a082676bc531877147202e3@i2pn2.org> <veec23$8jnq$1@dont-email.me> <c81fcbf97a35bd428495b0e70f3b54e545e8ae59@i2pn2.org> <vef37r$bknp$2@dont-email.me> <7e79306e9771378b032e6832548eeef7429888c4@i2pn2.org> <veikaf$14fb3$1@dont-email.me> <veipmb$15764$2@dont-email.me> <c56fcfcf793d65bebd7d17db4fccafd1b8dea072@i2pn2.org> <vejfg0$1879f$3@dont-email.me> <bde5947ebdcfb62ecd6e8968052cb3a25c4b1fec@i2pn2.org> <vekfi5$1d7rn$1@dont-email.me> <6d73c2d966d1d04dcef8f7f9e0c849e17bd73352@i2pn2.org> <velnqn$1n3gb$3@dont-email.me> <b06c4952248d83881642c7d84207d3d39c56c59f@i2pn2.org> <vend90$22rqh$1@dont-email.me> <vens4t$250b2$1@dont-email.me> <veos78$29dtl$7@dont-email.me> <97040a77da33a22295b056e260c896fd96f1ac94@i2pn2.org> <veotuk$2baph$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 10:47:23 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7f05503354eec5ee8ccd6a83bd8fd864";
	logging-data="4006497"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18CwocovQYvr+85biWUIj2H"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MmGGkNNeupDD16KQMaOyrZbHolw=
Bytes: 4249

On 2024-10-16 17:42:43 +0000, olcott said:

> On 10/16/2024 12:24 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:13:12 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 10/16/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-16 03:52:00 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>> On 10/15/2024 9:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/15/24 8:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/15/2024 4:58 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 20:12:37 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 12:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 5:53 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-10-13 12:49:01 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/12/24 8:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Trying to change to a different analytical framework than the
>>>>>>>>>>> one that I am stipulating is the strawman deception.
>>>>>>>>>>> *Essentially an intentional fallacy of equivocation error*
>>>>>>>>>> But, you claim to be working on that Halting Problem,
>>>>>>>>> I quit claiming this many messages ago and you didn't bother to
>>>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>>> Can you please give the date and time? Did you also explicitly
>>>>>>>> disclaim it or just silently leave it out?
>>>>>>> Even people of low intelligence that are not trying to be as
>>>>>>> disagreeable as possible would be able to notice that a specified C
>>>>>>> function is not a Turing machine.
>>>>>> But it needs to be computationally equivalent to one to ask about
>>>>>> Termination.
>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function A termination analyzer
>>>>> need not be a Turing computable function.
>>>> There is no known way to construct one that isn't. No computer can
>>>> execute a function that is not Turing computable.
>>> In other words you think that functions that rely on global data such
>>> that they are not a pure function of their inputs are A OK?
>> Says the one with an if(Root).
>> Apart from that, purity has nothing to do with computability.
>> 
> 
> Quite a few experts agree that the purity of a function
> ensures its computability. It was like pulling teeth to
> get this out of them.

Depends on whom you accpets as an "expert". I wouldn't accept one who
does not understand that there are pure functions that are known to
be uncomputable.

-- 
Mikko