Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.logic > #342991

Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability

From polcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups sci.logic, sci.math, comp.theory
Subject Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability
Date 2025-12-08 22:30 -0600
Message-ID <10h88kv$1c2nb$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References (25 earlier) <PeMZQ.41146$aeF6.31979@fx40.iad> <10h84b8$1bvst$1@solani.org> <NBMZQ.42371$aeF6.1611@fx40.iad> <10h86b0$1c0rh$1@solani.org> <9sNZQ.1877$C_K8.965@fx42.iad>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


On 12/8/2025 10:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 12/8/25 10:50 PM, polcott wrote:
>> On 12/8/2025 9:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 12/8/25 10:16 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/8/2025 8:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 12/8/25 9:34 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/8/2025 8:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/8/25 8:00 PM, polcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 12/8/2025 6:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What did I insufficeintly specify?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Troll
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In other words, you admit defeat.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not in the least little bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then why didn't you answer the question?
>>>>>
>>>>>> The key difference with you as a troll compared to
>>>>>> other trolls is that you do have a reasonably deep
>>>>>> understanding of some of these things.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, you admit that I know what I am talking about, and that you 
>>>>> just refuse to answer the question.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only logical reason, is because you can't, because you lied 
>>>>> about what you can do. After all, why would you hide the proof that 
>>>>> you are smarter than me?
>>>>>
>>>>> The answer, because you know you are out matched and are running 
>>>>> aways scared and trying to throw up a smoke screen.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following may not be over your head if you cared
>>>>>> to understand instead of being locked in rebuttal mode:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping from
>>>>>> their [finite string] inputs to an accept or reject
>>>>>> state on the basis that this [finite string] input
>>>>>> specifies or fails to specify a *particular* semantic
>>>>>> or syntactic property.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, but are only CORRECT if the answr they give matches the 
>>>>> answer to the problem they are SUPPOSED to decide on.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will give you a much simpler example.
>>>> If a universal truth predicate is defined
>>>> to return true when and expression is true
>>>> and false when an expression is false then
>>>> what does it correctly return for this:
>>>> True("What time is it")
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You have a problem with you definition,
>>>
>>> A Truth Predicate is defined to return True if the input statement is 
>>> true, and false for anything else, either a false statement, or a 
>>> statement without a truth value.
>>>
>>
>> That makes perfect sense to me, what is a
>> halt decider defined this way?
>>
>> true if it is determined that it halts else false.
> 
> No, not "DETERMINED", but *IF* it halts.
> 

True(X) if X is determined to be True,
false if false, gibberish or paradox.

> Just like the True predicate isn't asking if we can prove the statement, 
> just if it *is* true, 

On what basis? (I spent 28 years on this).

> and true can be different then proven. That truth 
> can be based on an infinite sequence of inferences, as that *IS* how 
> truth is defined.
> 
> The program DD() you have defined does halt because your HHH you have 
> defined returns 0 when HHH(DD) is called.
> 
> The fact that HHH can't determine this doesn't change the correct 
> answer, it just makes HHH wrong.
> 
> Truth is not subjective, but objective.
> 
>>
>>> Since, "What Time is it" doesn't have a truth value (as it is a 
>>> question, not an asserting)
>>>
>>> True("What time is it") is False.
>>>
>>> Again, your problem is you don't know the meaning of the words, and 
>>> try to redefine them to match your ignorancd.
>>>
>>> That makes you world just a lie.
>>
>> I examine the philosophical foundations of these things
>> that everyone else simply takes as "given".
>>
> 
> But don't understand what you are talking about.
> 

Like I said everyone here thinks that
examining philosophical foundations is nuts.

These foundations are already established and
been infallibly determined to be perfect.

> Since you fundamentally change the meaning of some of the words, nothing 
> you "think up" is actually applicable.
> 
> This come, in part, because you are just ignorant of many basic facts 
> about how logic works.


-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.

This required establishing a new foundation
for correct reasoning.

Back to sci.logic | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 10:32 -0600
  Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 17:53 +0000
    Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 12:07 -0600
      Re: A new category of thought dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 13:19 -0500
        Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 16:55 +0000
          Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:04 -0600
        Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 11:49 +0200
          Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 09:26 -0600
            Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-04 08:46 -0600
              Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:52 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-12-05 19:57 -0700
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 21:18 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 11:01 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:40 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:47 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:16 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:04 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 09:55 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:43 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-06 22:16 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 21:50 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-07 05:32 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-12-07 15:49 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 11:38 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 07:32 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 07:37 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 17:55 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 17:15 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-07 21:50 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:26 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 07:40 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 12:47 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 19:18 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 19:00 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:24 -0500
                Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 20:34 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 21:57 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:16 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 22:22 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 21:50 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-08 23:20 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 22:30 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 07:42 -0500
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 10:05 -0600
                Re: Key new insight into halting undecidability Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-09 23:02 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 02:14 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 21:21 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 07:07 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:41 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2025-12-08 19:39 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:57 +0200
              Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 11:30 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:53 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:33 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:42 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 09:03 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-08 06:12 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 07:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 10:18 -0600
      Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 20:23 +0000
        Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 14:51 -0600
          Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 16:27 -0500
            Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:53 -0800
              Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:17 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 16:35 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 20:10 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:49 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 19:50 -0800
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:59 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-01 23:11 -0500
          Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 21:39 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 15:59 -0600
              Re: A new category of thought Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-29 22:44 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-29 17:19 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 19:21 -0500
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:13 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 19:50 -0600
              Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-01 13:02 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 11:15 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-02 10:53 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 08:00 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-03 12:41 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 09:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-05 10:48 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-05 09:30 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 10:41 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-06 10:37 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-06 06:24 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-07 12:39 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-07 08:59 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-09 15:15 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 10:22 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-09 12:04 -0600
                Re: A new category of thought Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-12-14 13:02 +0200
                Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-02 01:39 +0000
                Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 20:01 -0600
          Re: A new category of thought Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-12-01 17:37 +0000
            Re: A new category of thought olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 13:44 -0600
  Re: A new category of thought Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-11-29 15:08 -0500

csiph-web