A Possible "solution" to the Halting Problem
in [Theory]
|
From: Daryl McCullough on 20 Oct 2006 19:58 Peter Olcott says... >"Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>So you agree that my example shows that within the specific context of this >>>example I have shown that this specific form of a Halting Problem is merely >>>the ill-formed question of: "Does LoopIfHalts(LoopIfHalts) halt?" >> >> That's not an ill-formed question. It is a perfectly good question, and it >> has a perfectly good answer: Yes, it halts (by throwing an exception). > >Yes you can see that the program halts, AND WillHalt() can also SEE that the >program halts. Then why did you call it an ill-formed question? You are contradicting yourself. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
From: Peter Olcott on 20 Oct 2006 20:16 "Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ehbn8a02euo(a)drn.newsguy.com... > Peter Olcott says... > >>Right there is the error. This reasoning has not shown that the HP is >>undecidable. There is a subtle but crucial distinction between deciding the >>correct answer to a question, and providing a correct answer to a question. > > No, as far as computer programs are concerned, there is no difference. > To say that a computer program can decide a question *means* that it > provides the correct answer. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY > int Greater(int X, int Y) { if (X > Y) return 1; // decided and provided return 0; // decided and provided } void Greater(int X, int Y) { if (X > Y) ; // decided, yet not provided }
From: Peter Olcott on 20 Oct 2006 20:18 "Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ehbnp802ggv(a)drn.newsguy.com... > Peter Olcott says... > >>> Would you be so kind and show us how WillHalt accomplishes this, in a more >>> precise form than a verbal comment? It all comes down to you definition of >>> MalignantSelfReference, which I believe is itself undecidable. >> >>I have already said this quite a few times in the ANALYTICAL COMMENTARY. > > Actually, it doesn't matter. If WillHalt raises an exception, instead > of answering "true" or "false", then it doesn't solve the halting problem > in this instance. It does not solve the HP, it merely shows the HP itself to be ill-formed. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY >
From: Peter Olcott on 20 Oct 2006 20:21 "Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ehbnrq02gnk(a)drn.newsguy.com... > Peter Olcott says... > >>"Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>So you agree that my example shows that within the specific context of this >>>>example I have shown that this specific form of a Halting Problem is merely >>>>the ill-formed question of: "Does LoopIfHalts(LoopIfHalts) halt?" >>> >>> That's not an ill-formed question. It is a perfectly good question, and it >>> has a perfectly good answer: Yes, it halts (by throwing an exception). >> >>Yes you can see that the program halts, AND WillHalt() can also SEE that the >>program halts. > > Then why did you call it an ill-formed question? You are contradicting > yourself. It is analogous to insisting on a verbal answer from a mute person. It is not that the mute has not correctly determining the answer. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY >
From: Daryl McCullough on 20 Oct 2006 20:14
Peter Olcott says... >If someone corrupted your output mechanism by tying you up and taping >your mouth shut, what correct answer would you provide? If my mouth were taped shut, I wouldn't provide a correct answer. But that doesn't make the question ill-formed. The question is perfectly well-formed, even though WillHalt fails to give the right answer, and me with my mouth taped up fails to give the right answer. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY |