Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.theory > #65062

Re: Refutation of the Ben Bacarisse Rebuttal and [Liar Paradox]

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/22/2023 10:10 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/19/2023 3:08 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>  > Just a reminder that you are arguing with someone who has declared that
>  > the wrong answer is the right one:
>  >
>  > Me: "do you still assert that [...] false is the "correct" answer even
>  >      though P(P) halts?"
>  >
>  > PO: Yes that is the correct answer even though P(P) halts.
> 
> Because
> *Ben Bacarisse targets my posts to discourage honest dialogue*
> *Ben Bacarisse targets my posts to discourage honest dialogue*
> *Ben Bacarisse targets my posts to discourage honest dialogue*
> All of my posts will be entitled as a Rebuttal to Ben
> 
> It is an easily verified fact that P correctly simulated by H cannot
> possibly reach its own last instruction and terminate normally thus from
> the Professor Sipser agreed criteria the input to H(P,P) does not halt.
> 
> MIT Professor Michael Sipser has agreed that the following verbatim
> words are correct (he has not agreed to anything else):
> (a) If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D until H
> correctly determines that its simulated D would never stop running
> unless aborted then
> (b) H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
> 
> To address what looks like a contradiction to reviewers not having a
> very deep understanding of the halting problem:
> 
> (1) A return value of 1 from H(D,D) means the input to H(D,D) has halted
> 
> (2) A return value of 0 from H(D,D) has been redefined to mean
>     (a) D does not halt
>     (b) D has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean value
>         that H returns.
> 
> THIS CHANGE UTTERLY REFUTES BEN'S REBUTTAL
> THIS CHANGE UTTERLY REFUTES BEN'S REBUTTAL
> THIS CHANGE UTTERLY REFUTES BEN'S REBUTTAL
> THIS CHANGE UTTERLY REFUTES BEN'S REBUTTAL
> 
> *Now for the new material*
> I am specifically defining the set of “halting problem” finite string
> pair instances such that TMD2 does the opposite of the Boolean value
> that each element of TMD1 returns.
> 
> The above set is the set where the behavior of the directly executed
> TMD2(TMD2) is out-of-sync with the return value of TMD1(TMD2,TMD2)
> *ONLY* because TMD2 has been defined to contradict whatever Boolean
> value that TMD1 returns.
> 
> This makes each {TMD1, TMD2} pair isomorphic to the Liar Paradox and the
> Liar Paradox: "This sentence is not true" is an unsound statement, thus
> the question: Is the Liar Paradox true or false becomes an unsound
> question.
> 
> Thus the question: "Does this input halt?"
> is isomorphic to this question:
> Is the Liar Paradox true or false?
> For every {TMD1, TMD2} pair defined above.
> 
> We can know in advance that every Boolean return value from every
> element of the set of TMD1 deciders necessarily out-of-sync with the
> behavior of its corresponding TMD2 input because every element of the
> {TMD1, TMD2} pairs has been defined to have that property.
> 
> When anyone says that we have to wait and see it is obvious that they
> are only playing deceptive head games.
> 

TMD1 is transformed from being a recognizer applied to TMD2 where TMD1
gets stuck in a loop into a decider for TMD2 that correctly determines
that TMD2 has pathological behavior relative to TMD1.


-- 
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Refutation of the Ben Bacarisse Rebuttal and [Liar Paradox] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 10:10 -0500
  Re: Refutation of the Ben Bacarisse Rebuttal and [Liar Paradox] olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-06-22 12:41 -0500
  Re: Refutation of the Peter Olcott's Rebuttal and [Liar Paradox] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2023-06-22 21:06 -0400

csiph-web