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


Groups > comp.theory > #49818

Re: On Strachey

From Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups comp.theory
Subject Re: On Strachey
Date 2022-05-06 03:53 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <87sfpn9xte.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <t51gn6$fjt$2@dont-email.me> <20220505225335.00007d75@reddwarf.jmc> <t51ig5$t3s$4@dont-email.me> <87czgrmok4.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <t51u9t$9co$3@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> writes:

> On 5/5/2022 8:34 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> On 5/5/2022 4:53 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 5 May 2022 16:48:21 -0500
>>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/5/2022 4:39 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 5 May 2022 16:30:41 -0500
>>>>>> olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>> On 5/5/2022 2:45 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>>>>> Strachey's "Impossible Program" [Strachey, 1965] is indeed
>>>>>>>> impossible but not for the reason Strachey suggests. Strachey's
>>>>>>>> impossible program is impossible not due to the contradiction he
>>>>>>>> posits but is instead impossible due to an invalid infinite
>>>>>>>> recursion (a category error in this case) which prevents the
>>>>>>>> contradiction from ever being realised. As Strachey claims his
>>>>>>>> "Impossible Program" proof is based on communication he had with
>>>>>>>> Turing it seems reasonable to assume that Turing's proof has the
>>>>>>>> same flaw.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suppose at some point I should stop trolling and actually read
>>>>>>>> what Turing wrote so I don't have to rely on what seems
>>>>>>>> reasonable. :D
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>>>>        
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What Turing wrote never mentions halting:
>>>>>>> https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/Turing_Paper_1936.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Alan Turing proved in 1936 that a general algorithm to solve the
>>>>>> halting problem for all possible program-input pairs cannot exist"
>>>>>> [Wikipedia, 2022]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes what you said is equally true:
>>>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235222082100050X
>>>>
>>>>    The fact it wasn't called The Halting Problem when Turing wrote his
>>>> paper doesn't really change any facts on the ground?
>>>
>>> Right, so it proves that you are right and Ben is wrong.
>>> What Turing wrote in 1936 is now known as the halting theorem.
>>
>> Two people who have not read the paper have persuaded themselves that
>> someone who has must be wrong about it.  Is there any need for facts?
>>
>> Turing's 1936 paper is not about halting.  It proves a related theorem
>> about the outputs -- the symbols a TM writes to the tape.  Did Turing
>> know, in 1936, that halting could not be decided?  Almost certainly.
>>
>> But he didn't prove it because his concern was about the strings
>> written, even those that are not finite.
>>
>> (It also uses a term, "cycle-free" that is likely to mislead the casual
>> reader.)
>
> Turing's paper is construed to be the foundation of the halting
> theorem even though the term halting was not applied to it until 1958.
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235222082100050X

It is not only construed to be, it /is/ the foundation of the halting
theorem.

-- 
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

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


Thread

On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-05 20:45 +0100
  Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 16:30 -0500
    Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-05 22:39 +0100
      Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 16:48 -0500
        Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-05 22:53 +0100
          Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 17:18 -0500
            Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-06 02:34 +0100
              Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 20:40 -0500
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-06 03:53 +0100
              Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-06 02:59 +0100
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-06 03:50 +0100
                Re: On Strachey Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-05 23:01 -0600
                Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-06 15:42 +0100
                Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-06 14:56 +0100
                Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 11:58 -0500
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-07 01:11 +0100
                Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 19:31 -0500
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-07 02:07 +0100
                Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 20:34 -0500
                Re: On Strachey Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-06 23:08 -0400
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-07 23:47 +0100
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-07 18:14 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 16:35 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-07 19:19 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 17:48 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-07 20:08 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 18:26 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-07 21:20 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 19:36 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 10:31 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 09:02 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 11:05 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 09:30 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 11:39 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 09:52 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 12:18 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 10:26 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 15:17 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 13:27 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 15:51 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 13:59 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 16:19 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 14:30 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 17:24 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 15:56 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 18:13 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 16:44 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:52 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:50 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 14:51 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 14:53 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 17:18 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 15:34 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 17:44 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 15:53 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 18:03 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 16:11 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 18:19 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 16:23 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 18:30 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] wij <wyniijj2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 16:42 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ][ proof that I am correct ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-10 07:16 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ][ proof that I am correct ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-10 19:23 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 20:02 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-09 16:12 -0600
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 17:36 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-09 20:13 -0600
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 23:39 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-09 22:22 -0500
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 20:48 -0700
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:43 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:40 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:39 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-09 19:37 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-07 21:09 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-07 21:22 -0400
                Re: On Strachey [ How nuts is that? ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-08 00:46 +0100
                Re: On Strachey Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-07 00:58 +0100
  Re: On Strachey Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-06 16:09 +0300
    Re: On Strachey Mr Flibble <flibble@reddwarf.jmc> - 2022-05-06 14:59 +0100
      Re: On Strachey Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-06 19:16 +0300
        Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 11:49 -0500
      Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 12:10 -0500
    Re: On Strachey olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 12:34 -0500

csiph-web