Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (PART-THREE)

From: Peter Olcott (olcott_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 06/25/04 

Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 11:50:15 GMT

> > The point is that NO ONE and NOTHING can possibly
> > correctly answer this question from the Halting Problem.
>
> This wasn't a part of Turing's proof. How exactly do you know that no
> one or nothing can answer the question? It's not like the question is
> anything like "What time is it in dollars and cents?" Anyway, I
> thought you said that an omnicient supercomputer could answer the
> question...
>
> 'cid 'ooh

You are free to disprove this claim by counter-example.
You provide the answer.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Peter Olcotts Source of Confusion
    ... the essential semantics remain the same. ... >If one accepts that the counter-example to the Halting Problem ... >the program halts. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Can you find anything wrong with this solution to the Halting Problem?
    ... >> I know that it must be much more fun to spout off refutations ... This is all clearly outlined in my original posting. ... defeats the counter-example provided by the original proof. ... of the Halting Problem) I think that I may have shown a way to ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Disproof of the Halting Problems Conclusion
    ... It is that my disprove of this proof has not yet ... proof of the unsolvability of the Halting Problem, ... everyone straight and explicitly pointing out the flaw in the proof. ... Now's your chance to show the world, Peter. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Peter Olcotts Source of Confusion
    ... > been claiming that the proofs were wrong previously. ... If one accepts that the counter-example to the Halting Problem ... the program halts. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Alan Turings Halting Problem is incorrectly formed
    ... >> You keep saying this, ... >Since this is the only counter-example to the claim, ... Thus the result is that the Halting Problem is transformed ... >from impossible to unknown. ...
    (sci.logic)
Quantcast