Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?
From: Daryl McCullough (daryl_at_atc-nycorp.com)
Date: 08/08/04
- Next message: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Previous message: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- In reply to: Peter Olcott: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Next in thread: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 8 Aug 2004 10:40:19 -0700
Peter Olcott says...
>
>
>"Daryl McCullough" <daryl@atc-nycorp.com> wrote
>> But a solution to the halting problem is a program that always returns
>> 0 or 1, by definition. If you introduce a third return value, then you
>> aren't solving the halting problem.
>Wrong. The solution to the Halting Problem ids any method that refutes this
>definition.
What does it mean to refute a definition?
What Turing proved was that there was no program H(x,y) that always
returns either 1 (if x is a code for a one-argument program that halts
on input y) or 0 (otherwise). If your program has three (or more) return
values, then it isn't a solution to the halting problem as Turing defined
it.
-- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
- Next message: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Previous message: Daryl McCullough: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- In reply to: Peter Olcott: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Next in thread: >parr\(*>: "Re: What is the Result from Invoking this Halt Function?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
