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

From: G. Frege (no_spam_at_aol.com)
Date: 07/11/04 

Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 21:01:07 +0200

On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 18:28:22 GMT, "Peter Olcott"
<olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>
> (1) If it is possible to keep this information from the LoopIfHalts()
> function, then it is impossible to create a LoopIfHalts() function
> that accomplishes its intended purpose.
>
But it IS NOT "possible" to keep this information from the LoopIfHalts()
- we could _always_ write a function (based on the code of WillHalt() -
if there were such a function) which just delivers the information to
the LoopIfHalts() program. :-)

Simple consideration: WillHalt() must have THE FULL INFORMATION. (Won't
you agree?) Then it's possible to "open a channel" which allows to
TRANSWER this information to other parts of a program. (In a object
oriented environment we may use /methods/ for that purpose.)

>
> (2) If it is impossible to create a LoopIfHalts() function that
> accomplishes its intended purpose, then using the LoopIfHalts()
> function as a valid counter-example to the claim that {universal
> halt detection is possible} is defeated.
>
But IT IS possible to write a program <BAD> based on the code of your
function WillHalt() [if there were such a function].

The b a d thing about <BAD> is that it will hold iff WillHalt() says it
won't <delivered as some key on the screen>, and vice versa.

With other word's your WillHalt() CAN'T do what you claimed it will be
able to do.

F.

Relevant Pages
Quantcast