Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?
From: Peter Olcott (olcott_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 08/04/04
- Next message: Peter Olcott: "Re: Foundation for a Formal Refutation of the Original Halting Problem?"
- Previous message: Peter Olcott: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Next in thread: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Reply: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 01:15:53 GMT
"Daryl McCullough" <daryl@atc-nycorp.com> wrote in message news:ceo8qv01dic@drn.newsguy.com...
> Simon G Best says...
>
> >>>>>>>So WillHalt02 checks if LoopIfHalts halts when given as input the source
> >>>>>>>to LoopIfHalts? But LoopIfHalts takes two parameters so how are you
> >>>>>>>breaking up LoopIfHalts into ProgramSourceFile and InputData?
> >>
> >> This question from five posts ago? (when there are that many levels
> >> of quote marks it doesn't look like a current question)
> >
> >It's only five posts ago because you failed to answer it when it was one
> >post ago, and failed to even read it when it was only three posts ago.
>
> Yes, this error, which Peter has made *repeatedly* without bothering
> to fix (even though the fix is trivial) is an important clue, I think,
> to Peter's problem. He's a programmer, so I'm sure he would never
> write
>
> void LoopIfHalts(String M, String x) {
> if (H(M,x)) {
> while (true) {}
> }
> }
>
> LoopIfHalts(LoopIfHalts);
>
> He would *know* that makes no sense, because (1) LoopIfHalts
> is defined to have two string arguments, and (2) LoopIfHalts
> is not a string, it is a program, so it makes no sense to treat
> it as if it were a string. (You need a coding function.)
So I make several trivial errors that have no effect on my main
point, from my single minded focus on this main point. So what?
> But Peter starts off by assuming the existence of a WillHalt
> function, and so he's already in fantasyland, so he thinks
> all bets are off. He throws out everything he knows about
> programming, including the fact that a function with two
> arguments can't be treated like a function with one argument.
> He throws out what he knows about programs, that---unless a
> program refers to global variables (or "static variables" in
> Java), or gets inputs from the user, or reads from some input
> stream, or uses a random number generator---if you run the same
> program twice on the same arguments, you will typically get the
> same result.
>
> Some people have a real problem with conditional reasoning. Once
> they start reasoning under a counterfactual assumption, they toss
> out everything they know.
>
> --
> Daryl McCullough
> Ithaca, NY
>
- Next message: Peter Olcott: "Re: Foundation for a Formal Refutation of the Original Halting Problem?"
- Previous message: Peter Olcott: "Re: Yet another Attempt at Disproving the Halting Problem"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Next in thread: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Reply: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|