The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.

When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
different meaning thus is a different question.

Linguistics understands that the same word-for-word question can
have an entirely different meaning based on the linguistic
context of who is asked.

As a concrete example the question:
"Are you a little girl?"
has different correct answers depending on who is asked.

H and H1 and D are shown in this source-code
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c

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

On 12/24/23 12:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>
> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
> different meaning thus is a different question.
>
> Linguistics understands that the same word-for-word question can
> have an entirely different meaning based on the linguistic
> context of who is asked.
>
> As a concrete example the question:
> "Are you a little girl?"
> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>
> H and H1 and D are shown in this source-code
> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
>
> ===

WHy do you keep repeating the same FALSE statements and not even attempt
to refute the errors pointed out.

ANSWER: BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU ARE JUST A PATHOLOGICAL LIAR and have NO
basis for your claims.

On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.

No, you just don't understand it.

Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.

> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
> different meaning thus is a different question.

Wrong.

> As a concrete example the question:
> "Are you a little girl?"
> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.

Mathematics doesn't.

On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>
> No, you just don't understand it.
>
> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>
>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>
> Wrong.
>
>> As a concrete example the question:
>> "Are you a little girl?"
>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>
> Mathematics doesn't.
>

When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.

H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.

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

On 12/24/23 1:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>
>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>
>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>
>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>
>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>
>
> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>
> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>

Nope, because the input is based on a particular H that behaves a
particular way so both answers are NOT possible for that H.

You don't seem to understand the fundamental aspect of programs that
programs only give the answer they were programmed to give for a
particular question.

You confuse them with volitional beings.

Maybe your problem is that you yourself aren't actually a volitional
being, because you have locked yourself on a pre-determend path, and
thus confuse the capabilities of deterministic and volitional entities.

On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>
>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>
>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>
>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>
>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>
>
> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>
> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>

"Nope, because the input is based on a particular H that behaves a
particular way so both answers are NOT possible for that H."

When-so-ever any yes/no question posed to a particular
entity has no correct answer from this entity that makes
the yes/no question an incorrect question for this entity.

Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this [yes/no] question?
Is a concrete example of such a question.

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

On 12/24/23 1:50 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>
>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>
>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>
>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>
>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>
>>
>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>
>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>
>
> "Nope, because the input is based on a particular H that behaves a
>  particular way so both answers are NOT possible for that H."
>
> When-so-ever any yes/no question posed to a particular
> entity has no correct answer from this entity that makes
> the yes/no question an incorrect question for this entity.

But there IS a correct answer for every entity, just not the one that
entity gives.

That IS a correct question.

>
> Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this [yes/no] question?
> Is a concrete example of such a question.
>

Nope, Strawman, Category Error. Comparing volitional beings to
computations is an error.

"Can" means something differnt between a determininist machine and a
volitional being.

You NEVER ask "Can" about a specific dterministic machine, as it either
does or it doesn't. You can ask "Can" about a class of machines, which
means does there exist in that class that does.

So, when we ask Can a Halt Decider answer correctly about a particular
input (that is a D built on a particular decider), the answer is Yes,
there are many Halt Deciders that will give the correct answer for that
particulal give the correct answer for that particual input.

Note, we can not build an input that acts contrary to whatever machine
we give it, only to one particular one, so the question of Can we answer
this question correctly (with SOME machine), has a positive answer.

When you try to change the question to be about the input designed for
the machine we are asking, you no longer are asking the same question of
Computibility Theory, to each machine, and thus the impossiblity here
doesn't invalidate the question of Computability theory.

So, you are just showing you don't understand what you are doing, or
even the basics of what is a proper question.

On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>
>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>
>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>
>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>
>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>
>
> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>
> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>

For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.

The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
places no actual limit on anyone or anything.

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

On 12/24/23 3:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>
>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>
>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>
>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>
>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>
>>
>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>
>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>
>
> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>
> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>

So, is your "D" the same input for every H, in which case the claim is
false, as there are multiple H in the set that give the right answer for
this input.

If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a specific
question, so you are not saying that any one of them has no correct
answer. Every D in that set has a correct answer, and there exist some
H's in that set that might give it.

If you are talking that for every H there is a D that it can not answer
correctly, you are right, that there is no combiniation that gives the
correct answer, but, since EVERY INDIVIDUAL question had a correct
answer, and thus is a valid question, all you have done is PROVE the
statement you are trying to refute, that for every H there exist an
valid input that it doesn't answer correctly.

You are also just showing that you don't understand how logic actually
works.

You are just proving your ignorance of what you are doing.

On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>
>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>
>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>
>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>>
>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>
>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>
>>
>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>
>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>
>
> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>
> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>

"If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
specific question"

When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
of identical H's that only vary by return value:

In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
thus incorrect question for both of these H's.

Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
is the exact same question for both of these H's.

For any other H with the exact same D
"Does D(D) halt?"

is a different question that has a different meaning in
the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
question depending on who you ask.

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

On 12/24/23 4:24 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>>
>>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>>
>>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>>
>>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>>
>>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>>
>>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>>
>>
>> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
>> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
>> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>>
>> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
>> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>>
>
> "If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
> specific question"
>
> When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
> value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
> of identical H's that only vary by return value:

The H's can not be "Identical" except for return value.

I thought you were proposing things had to make symantic sense?

You are just PROVING that you don't understand what you are talking about.

How can things be the "same" but also have a "difference"?

IF the H's actually ARE different, then the D's are different.

You are just proving yourself to be a pathological liar.

>
> In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
> answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
> thus incorrect question for both of these H's.
>

Nope. You started with a self-contradictory statement that you have two
identical H's that behave differently.

Keep it up, maybe you can burn out the last remain synapse in your brain.

> Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
> is the exact same question for both of these H's.

Nopoe, because your H's just aren't.

You have started with a statement akin to, let us assume that True is
False by starting with two IDENTICAL machines that act differently.

Maybe we should see if the school that gave you a degree feels your
stupidity is enough to recind the degree.

At least you have admitted that it wasn't a degree in "Computer
Science", but only that you claim to have taken enough credits to have
gotten one. Obviously, you didn't actually learn anything you were
suposed to.

>
> For any other H with the exact same D
> "Does D(D) halt?"
>
> is a different question that has a different meaning in
> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
> question depending on who you ask.

Mope, you don't even seem to understand what a QUESTION is.

I guess your IQ is proved to be negative.

On 12/24/2023 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>>
>>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>>
>>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>>
>>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>>
>>>> Wrong.
>>>>
>>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>>
>>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>>
>>>
>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>>
>>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>>
>>
>> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
>> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
>> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>>
>> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
>> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>>
>
> "If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
> specific question"
>
> When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
> value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
> of identical H's that only vary by return value:
>
> In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
> answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
> thus incorrect question for both of these H's.
>
> Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
> is the exact same question for both of these H's.
>
> For any other H with the exact same D
> "Does D(D) halt?"
>
> is a different question that has a different meaning in
> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
> question depending on who you ask.
>
>

"The H's can not be "Identical" except for return value."

In the "c" H it is swapping a pair of integer constants: {0,1}

In the Linz H it is swapping a pair of literal constants referring to
final states: {H.qy, H.qn}

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

On 12/24/23 4:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>>>
>>>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>>>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>>>
>>>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>>>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>>>
>>>
>>> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
>>> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
>>> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>>>
>>> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
>>> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>>>
>>
>> "If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
>> specific question"
>>
>> When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
>> value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
>> of identical H's that only vary by return value:
>>
>> In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
>> answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
>> thus incorrect question for both of these H's.
>>
>> Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
>> is the exact same question for both of these H's.
>>
>> For any other H with the exact same D
>> "Does D(D) halt?"
>>
>> is a different question that has a different meaning in
>> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
>> question depending on who you ask.
>>
>>
>
> "The H's can not be "Identical" except for return value."
>
> In the "c" H it is swapping a pair of integer constants: {0,1}
>
> In the Linz H it is swapping a pair of literal constants referring to
> final states: {H.qy, H.qn}
>
>

So, it isn't IDENTICAL, only close with a small difference, which makes
them DIFFERENT.

That is like saying 1 and 2 are "Identical" execpt for the value they hold.

Identical EXCEPT for a small difference is DIFFERENT.

Correct EXCEPT for a small error is WRONG

True EXCEPT for a small execption is NOT TRUE.

In other words, you are admitting to LYING.

YOU SAID, the H's were identical (except for one returning a different
answer) and thus the D's wer IDENTICAL.

Since the D's inhereted the difference of the H's, and thus are
different, all you are doing is proving that you think lying is ok,

Just like apparently you think it is ok to be watching kiddie porn and
tell people its ok because you are GOD.

You are just a stupid pathological lying MORON.

On 12/24/2023 3:45 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect question
>>>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>>>
>>>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question has a
>>>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>>>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>>>
>>>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>>>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>>>
>>>
>>> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
>>> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
>>> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>>>
>>> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
>>> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>>>
>>
>> "If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
>> specific question"
>>
>> When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
>> value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
>> of identical H's that only vary by return value:
>>
>> In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
>> answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
>> thus incorrect question for both of these H's.
>>
>> Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
>> is the exact same question for both of these H's.
>>
>> For any other H with the exact same D
>> "Does D(D) halt?"
>>
>> is a different question that has a different meaning in
>> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
>> question depending on who you ask.
>>
>>
>
> "The H's can not be "Identical" except for return value."
>
> In the "c" H it is swapping a pair of integer constants: {0,1}
>
> In the Linz H it is swapping a pair of literal constants referring to
> final states: {H.qy, H.qn}
>
>

"So, it isn't IDENTICAL, only close with a small difference, which makes
them DIFFERENT.

H's are indeed IDENTICAL except for return value so you are WRONG !!!

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

On 12/24/23 5:48 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 3:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/24/2023 3:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2023 2:32 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/24/2023 12:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 12/24/2023 12:32 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/24/23 18:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> The halting problem <is> a self-contradictory thus incorrect
>>>>>>> question
>>>>>>> when posed to termination analyzer H with input D.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, you just don't understand it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever program/input pair either halts or doesn't halt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When posed to termination analyzer H1 with input D the question
>>>>>>> has a
>>>>>>> different meaning thus is a different question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a concrete example the question:
>>>>>>> "Are you a little girl?"
>>>>>>> has different correct answers depending on who is asked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mathematics doesn't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer because D was intentionally
>>>>> defined to do the opposite of whatever H says.
>>>>>
>>>>> H1 can correctly answer the same verbatim question because D was
>>>>> not intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever H1 says.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For the infinite set of every H having a corresponding D
>>>> that has been defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean
>>>> value that H returns: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>>> is a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for each H.
>>>>
>>>> The inability to correctly answer self-contradictory questions
>>>> places no actual limit on anyone or anything.
>>>>
>>>
>>> "If D changes per H in the set, then you are not talking about a
>>> specific question"
>>>
>>> When D is specifically defined to do the opposite of whatever
>>> value that H returns then there is one identical D and a pair
>>> of identical H's that only vary by return value:
>>>
>>> In this case the only reason that both of these H's get the wrong
>>> answer is that the question: "Does D(D) halt?" is a self-contradictory
>>> thus incorrect question for both of these H's.
>>>
>>> Since it is the exact same D then: "Does D(D) halt?"
>>> is the exact same question for both of these H's.
>>>
>>> For any other H with the exact same D
>>> "Does D(D) halt?"
>>>
>>> is a different question that has a different meaning in
>>> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
>>> question depending on who you ask.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> "The H's can not be "Identical" except for return value."
>>
>> In the "c" H it is swapping a pair of integer constants: {0,1}
>>
>> In the Linz H it is swapping a pair of literal constants referring to
>> final states: {H.qy, H.qn}
>>
>>
>
> "So, it isn't IDENTICAL, only close with a small difference, which makes
> them DIFFERENT.
>
> H's are indeed IDENTICAL except for return value so you are WRONG !!!
>

But IDENTICAL EXECEPT ... is DIFFERENT!

THe strcmp of the representations are DIFFERENT, so they are DIFFERENT.

You just don't understand basic truths.

Or the meaning of words!

Or is your logic system good, except it can't do any thing?

It seems that if falls prey to the problems of Natural Language being
inprecise.

On 12/24/23 19:37, olcott wrote:
> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer

Wrong. D(D) halts or it doesn't halt.

On 12/24/23 19:50, olcott wrote:

> "Nope, because the input is based on a particular H that behaves a
>  particular way so both answers are NOT possible for that H."
>
> When-so-ever any yes/no question posed to a particular
> entity has no correct answer from this entity that makes
> the yes/no question an incorrect question for this entity.

What you just said made no sense.

>
> Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this [yes/no] question?
> Is a concrete example of such a question.
>

D(D) is not this type of question. It halts or it doesn't halt.

On 12/24/23 21:32, olcott wrote:
>
> For the infinite set of every H
Is H an infinite set, or is it a program? Make up your mind.

On 12/24/23 22:24, olcott wrote:
>
> For any other H with the exact same D
> "Does D(D) halt?"
>
> is a different question that has a different meaning in
> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
> question depending on who you ask.
>

How can it be a different question when it's the exact same question and
makes no reference to subjective pronouns like "you"?

On 12/24/23 23:48, olcott wrote:

> H's are indeed IDENTICAL except for return value

so they are different

On 12/24/2023 7:45 PM, immibis wrote:
> On 12/24/23 19:37, olcott wrote:
>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer
>
> Wrong. D(D) halts or it doesn't halt.
>

Yet both Yes and No are the wrong answer when the question
is posed to H because D was intentionally defined to do
the opposite of whatever Boolean value that H returns.

This is not the case for H1(D,D) thus proving that H and H1
are being asked a different question even though D is identical
in both cases.

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

On 12/24/2023 7:53 PM, immibis wrote:
> On 12/24/23 22:24, olcott wrote:
>>
>> For any other H with the exact same D
>> "Does D(D) halt?"
>>
>> is a different question that has a different meaning in
>> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
>> question depending on who you ask.
>>
>
> How can it be a different question when it's the exact same
> question and
> makes no reference to subjective pronouns like "you"?
>

The arguments to the function H(D,D) are asking H about D(D).
The arguments to the function H1(D,D) are asking H1 about D(D).

When D is intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever
value that H returns this proves that the question:

Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
is a different question for H than for H1 even
though D itself is the exact same input.

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

On 12/24/23 8:52 PM, immibis wrote:
> On 12/24/23 19:50, olcott wrote:
>
>> "Nope, because the input is based on a particular H that behaves a
>>   particular way so both answers are NOT possible for that H."
>>
>> When-so-ever any yes/no question posed to a particular
>> entity has no correct answer from this entity that makes
>> the yes/no question an incorrect question for this entity.
>
> What you just said made no sense.
>
>>
>> Can Jack correctly answer “no” to this [yes/no] question?
>> Is a concrete example of such a question.
>>
>
> D(D) is not this type of question. It halts or it doesn't halt.

You have to understand that Peter Olcott doesn't seem to be able to
distinguish between a queston being asked to a volitional being and a
question being asked to a deterministic machine. (Perhaps because he has
trapped himself into a deterministic mind trap and no longer has free will).

He has a point, that if you ask a volitional being a question, that any
answer that being is allowed to give, then the question could be
considered in some way improper.

The key is that for a deterministic machine, there may be a right answer
that it was ALLOWED to give, but didn't as that isn't what its algorithm
determined, so that machine can't actually give that answer.

This is the problem with H.

In his case, when he gets into the details, his H will return the
"non-halting" answer, which causes D to be halting. H does have a
correct answer that it is ALLOWED to give, which would be halting, but
that isn't the answer it DOES give.

His "Identical but different" machines is to try to "magic" volition
into the machines so the same machine could give different answers to
the same quesitons.

He tries all different version of the song and dance, but it al boils
down to the fact that it seems he doesn't understand that a given
machine when given the same input will ALWAYS produce the same answer,
even if "we" can see the answer will be wrong, and have tried to define
the machine to "get the right answer".

THe problem being, "get the right answer" isn't a programable
instruction, but we need to define a actual way to GET that right
answer, and when working on a problem that gets to reference the
decider, that might not be possible.

On 12/24/23 11:03 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 7:53 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 12/24/23 22:24, olcott wrote:
>>>
>>> For any other H with the exact same D
>>> "Does D(D) halt?"
>>>
>>> is a different question that has a different meaning in
>>> the same way that: "Are you a little girl?" is a different
>>> question depending on who you ask.
>>>
>>
>> How can it be a different question when it's the exact same question
>> and makes no reference to subjective pronouns like "you"?
>>
>
> The arguments to the function H(D,D) are asking H about D(D).
> The arguments to the function H1(D,D) are asking H1 about D(D).
>

And how does the behavior of D(D) directly executed changed based on who
you ask about it?

> When D is intentionally defined to do the opposite of whatever
> value that H returns this proves that the question:
>
> Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
> is a different question for H than for H1 even
> though D itself is the exact same input.
>

How?

The behavor of H1 or this copy of H being asked have no impact on the
behavior being asked about. We are asking about the behavior of the
direct execution of D(D), and that behavior is FIXED (yes, because the
behavior of H(D,D) is fixed for all copies of H).

Thus, WHO or WHAT you ask the question to has no impact on the correct
answer.

You just don't seem to understand that H's answer was fixed when you
designed H, and that happened, by necessity, before this D came into
existance, and thus arguments about H acting differently are just not
applicable at this point.

If H acted differently, it is a DIFFERENT machine, and this D wouldn't
change, becuase this D is built on the ORIGINAL H.

Yes, your program model doesn't do this, because your model is INCORRECT
and isn't actually an equivalent for the Turing Machine pair decribed in
the proof. The fact you can't understand how Turing Machines work so you
don't understand this doesn't negate that fact.

On 12/24/23 11:03 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 12/24/2023 7:45 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 12/24/23 19:37, olcott wrote:
>>> When H is asked: Does the direct execution of D(D) halt?
>>> Both Yes and No are the wrong answer
>>
>> Wrong. D(D) halts or it doesn't halt.
>>
>
> Yet both Yes and No are the wrong answer when the question
> is posed to H because D was intentionally defined to do
> the opposite of whatever Boolean value that H returns.
>
> This is not the case for H1(D,D) thus proving that H and H1
> are being asked a different question even though D is identical
> in both cases.
>

No. The answer that H(D,D) gives is the wrong answer, the other answer
is Right.

H(D,D) just can't give that answer, because that isn't what its program
says it will do.

The fact that H1(D,D) might (and in this case does) give the right
answer shows that a right answer does exist.

Remember, H gives the answer it gives, and to change the answer tha tit
gives, it makes it a DIFFERENT program (and if you then change D, you
have a different question).

You just seem to have a fundamental block about how programs actually
work, and don't understand how determinism works.

Maybe you don't like the fact that there ARE rules that make some things
True or Right and some things FALSE or WRONG, and you don't get to
decide that for yourself, unless you are working unless you are working
in a logic system solely of your creation, but even then, once you
define the rules and the starting data, you no longer have "control"
over what happens, as the rules will take over.