Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Halting Problem: How my refutation differs to Peter Olcott's
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 17:07:33 +0100
Organization: Fix this later
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <vvt6c5$15hku$1@dont-email.me>
References: <BPOTP.66191$v0S.4884@fx14.ams4>
 <3bc01824e1d95a30b9784942a8b7ef3bc9ec8ff8@i2pn2.org>
 <UIRTP.228282$_Npd.219273@fx01.ams4>
 <1cecbb270dfb6a7c37ce23eb4b722f1b85c0e7d3@i2pn2.org>
 <Fb0UP.77777$JJT6.37000@fx16.ams4> <vvs868$vp30$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvt0qm$14pca$2@dont-email.me> <vvt15v$13l2b$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvt5dp$14pca$11@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 18:07:33 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="326561ee20835be188f66800f9e0102a";
	logging-data="1230494"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19igF/CEID5Noi11r6w+Y3GxpmIFpq/g7on2AuDj3M1Mw=="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qgwLDaxiB1Fy4i0cW//rpaZZ7zs=
In-Reply-To: <vvt5dp$14pca$11@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 2699

On 12/05/2025 16:51, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2025 9:38 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 12/05/2025 15:32, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/12/2025 2:32 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2025-05-11 11:52:05 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 11 May 2025 11:49:50 +0000, joes wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>> No. HHH has a string representation, like every program.
>>>>>
>>>>> No. Conflating a program with a string representation of the 
>>>>> same program
>>>>> in the manner of a self-referential dependency is a category 
>>>>> (type) error.
>>>>
>>>> There are several meanings for the word "program" but a 
>>>> common one is a
>>>> string that specifies what shall happen when the program is 
>>>> executed.
>>>> One possible string representation of that string is the 
>>>> string itself.
>>>>
>>>
>>> A better name is computational unit.
>>
>> That's a terrible name. But okay, if you think it's better, who 
>> is anyone here to stop you using it? Just don't expect me to.
>>
> 
> What other name encompasses
> (a) subroutines
> (b) programs
> (c) integrated systems comprised of many programs

If you like 'computational unit', go for it. Nobody's stopping you.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within