From: Martin 'Musatov' Mersenne on
==P Versus NP Solution Claimed==

We say that a language L is c.e. (or semi-decidable) iff L = L(M) for
some Turing machine M. We say that L is decidable iff L = L(M) for
some Turing machine M which satisfies the condition that M halts on
all input strings w. There is an equivalent definition of c.e. which
brings out its analogy with NP, namely L is c.e. iff there is a
computable “checking relation” R(x,y) such that L = {x | *yR(x,y)}.
Using the [now]: act[i][on] *M* to define [now]: e is a string
describing a Turing machine M, we define the Halting [solut[i][on]] HP
as follows: HP = {*M* | M is a Turing machine which halts on input
*M*} 3.
From: porky_pig_jr on
On May 10, 3:12 pm, "Martin 'Musatov' Mersenne"
<marty.musa...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> ==P Versus NP Solution Claimed==
>
> We say that a language L is c.e. (or semi-decidable) iff L = L(M) for
> some Turing machine M. We say that L is decidable iff L = L(M) for
> some Turing machine M which satisfies the condition that M halts on
> all input strings w. There is an equivalent definition of c.e. which
> brings out its analogy with NP, namely L is c.e. iff there is a
> computable “checking relation” R(x,y) such that L = {x | *yR(x,y)}.
> Using the [now]: act[i][on] *M* to define [now]: e is a string
> describing a Turing machine M, we define the Halting [solut[i][on]] HP
> as follows: HP = {*M* | M is a Turing machine which halts on input
> *M*} 3.

To Pee or To Not Pee: this is the question.