Re: Can you find anything wrong with this solution to the Halting Problem?

From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich_at_math.okstate.edu)
Date: 07/11/04 

Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 10:36:23 -0500

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 14:35:36 GMT, "Peter Olcott"
<olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>> >I am not refuting the proof, I am refuting the conclusion
>> >based on the proof. The conclusion that states that it is
>> >impossible to construct a function that will accomplish
>> >universal halt detection.
>>
>> Huh? I give up. To refute the conclusion you have
>> to actually show us the program that solves the
>> halting problem.
>
>We are just mincing words here. Let's try to get the statement
>precisely correct.
>
>(Paraphrase)
>The conclusion of the original proof was that it had proven
>that it is impossible to construct a function that can correctly
>detect halting over the universal set of programs.
>
>My counter-example attempts to directly refute this statement.

You're making really much less sense than usual today.
That's exactly the statement that led to my "huh".
The only way to refute that is to show us the program
that actually does the halt detection. You haven't
done anything remotely like that.

>You had a very good point that it would be very difficult to make
>access to the key impossible. I am not sure if my reply has fully
>addressed this issue, and until this issue is fully addressed the
>validity of my refutation remains open.

No. You continue to simply _ignore_ explanations of why
making access to the key impossible is simply _irrelevant_.

>My best estimate of ensuring that the LoopIfHalts() function
>does not have access to the key is twofold:
>
>(1) It is not loaded until after the key has been transmitted
>and cleared from the screen.
>
>(2) Hardware memory protection prevents access to the
>WilHalt() process by the LoopIfHalts() function.
>

************************

David C. Ullrich

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Solution to the halting Problem?
    ... >> The authors misinterpretation of the halting problem seems to ... LoopIfHaltsto function does not refute this method. ... One single case where the security is not ... that causes the WillHaltmethod to fail, and then says that this is not ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem
    ... > result to the function being analyzed, and you leap to the stupid ... > you expect to refute me if you don't even know what i am saying ??? ... No one has to read your silly bumbling at the URL noted to refute you. ... You have claimed both that the proof of the halting problem is flawed ...
    (comp.theory)
  • Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem
    ... > result to the function being analyzed, and you leap to the stupid ... > you expect to refute me if you don't even know what i am saying ??? ... No one has to read your silly bumbling at the URL noted to refute you. ... You have claimed both that the proof of the halting problem is flawed ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Driver Licensing not about highway safety
    ... You need to brush up on your definitions of legal terms. ... Couldn't refute the argument, huh? ...
    (rec.travel.usa-canada)
  • Re: Disproof of the Halting Problems Conclusion
    ... |> To show that the Halting Problem Conclusion has not ... |> In order to refute the Halting Problem conclusion ... You believe you have proved the existence of WillHaltPO. ... Is your rng software based? ...
    (comp.theory)