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

From: The Ghost In The Machine (ewill_at_aurigae.athghost7038suus.net)
Date: 07/14/04 

Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 04:01:00 GMT

In sci.logic, G Frege
<no_spam@aol.com>
 wrote
on Mon, 12 Jul 2004 17:58:51 +0200
<v8d5f0dgqah4pg1d0phvhb624sova61m34@4ax.com>:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:01:00 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
> <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not entirely sure what to make of it beyond the fact that
>> Peter has not refuted the proof, merely inserted an interesting
>> blocker into one of the proof's tactics (namely, the duplication
>> of the input).
>>
> Nonsense.

I did not say it was a useful blocker, merely an interesting one.
And it's not that much of a blocker, from a mathematical standpoint;
from a practical one, though, the brute-force keycrack might take
awhile.

The proof's problematic anyway, even though it is perfectly valid;
it doesn't say whether the proposed implementation of WillHalt()
will take 1 second, 1 minute, 1 day, 1 year, 1 century, 1 eon,
or 1 billion revolutions of the Sun around the central black
core of the Milky Way. (It doesn't really need to, of course.)

>From a practical standpoint, the proof simply states what might
have been though as merely difficult is now impossible. 

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.