Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)
From: Chris Menzel (cmenzel_at_remove-this.tamu.edu)
Date: 07/11/04
- Next message: Chris Menzel: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Previous message: Aatu Koskensilta: "Re: Gödel's Incompleteness vs. completeness theorem s"
- In reply to: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Next in thread: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Reply: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 11 Jul 2004 12:05:06 GMT
On 11 Jul 2004 03:20:14 -0500, Acme Diagnostics
<LFinezapthis@partpostmark.net> said:
> I'm fairly sure that a real "Halt()" function will never be written in
> any useful time-frame,
Well, since we know it is impossible to write one in *any* time frame,
you can certainly be fairly sure that one won't be written in any useful
time frame!
Let me ask you: Are you only "fairly sure" that you will never encounter
two integers m,n such that (m/n)**2 = 2?
Chris Menzel
- Next message: Chris Menzel: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Previous message: Aatu Koskensilta: "Re: Gödel's Incompleteness vs. completeness theorem s"
- In reply to: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Next in thread: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Reply: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]