On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a category >>>>>>> error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a simulating halt >>>>>>> decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year ago >>>>>>> on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>> category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a category >>>>>>>> error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a simulating >>>>>>>> halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year ago >>>>>>>> on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>> category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. You >>>>>> did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or what is >>>>>> the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a category >>>>>>>>> error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a simulating >>>>>>>>> halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined is >>>>>>>> a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. You >>>>>>> did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or what is >>>>>>> the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined is >>>>>>>>> a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. You >>>>>>>> did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or what is >>>>>>>> the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
The category error is typically stated indirectly by
requiring a Turing machine based halt decider to report
on the behavior of a directly executed Turing machine.
It can be easily corrected by changing the requirement
to report on the behavior that its finite string input
specifies.
*I have conclusively proven that these behaviors diverge*
That people cannot understand this proof does not mean that
it is not a proof.
On 7/22/25 9:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined >>>>>>>>>> is a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. >>>>>>>>> You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or >>>>>>>>> what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
How is that a category error, when it is EXACTLY the category of things
that are supposed to be give (via representation) to it.
On 7/22/25 9:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined >>>>>>>>>> is a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual error. >>>>>>>>> You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or >>>>>>>>> what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
How is that a category error, when it is EXACTLY the category of things
that are supposed to be give (via representation) to it.
The category error is typically stated indirectly by
requiring a Turing machine based halt decider to report
on the behavior of a directly executed Turing machine.
WHich is what it needs to do,
It can be easily corrected by changing the requirement
to report on the behavior that its finite string input
specifies.
WHich *IS* the behavior of the directed executed machine.
All you are doing is admitting to lying by putting forward a strawman.
You seem to assume you are allowed to change the rules of the system and still be in the system.
Sorry, that just shows you utter ignorance of the rules of logic.
*I have conclusively proven that these behaviors diverge*
That people cannot understand this proof does not mean that
it is not a proof.
Nope, all you have conclusively proven is that you don't understand the meaning of the words you are using.
Since you can't actually connect your words to correct usage of the
accepted definitions of the words, and the accepted principles of the
filed, you are just showing you are just lying.
On 7/22/2025 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/22/25 9:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined >>>>>>>>>>> is a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual
error. You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or >>>>>>>>>> what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
How is that a category error, when it is EXACTLY the category of
things that are supposed to be give (via representation) to it.
The category error is typically stated indirectly by
requiring a Turing machine based halt decider to report
on the behavior of a directly executed Turing machine.
WHich is what it needs to do,
It can be easily corrected by changing the requirement
to report on the behavior that its finite string input
specifies.
WHich *IS* the behavior of the directed executed machine.
All you are doing is admitting to lying by putting forward a strawman.
You seem to assume you are allowed to change the rules of the system
and still be in the system.
Sorry, that just shows you utter ignorance of the rules of logic.
*I have conclusively proven that these behaviors diverge*
That people cannot understand this proof does not mean that
it is not a proof.
Nope, all you have conclusively proven is that you don't understand
the meaning of the words you are using.
Both of the best two chatbots were also surprised that
I proved that a correct simulation does not match the
direct execution when the input calls its own simulator.
All four of them immediately understood that DDD correctly
simulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its own "return"
instruction final halt state.
On 7/22/2025 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/22/25 9:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined >>>>>>>>>>> is a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual
error. You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or >>>>>>>>>> what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
How is that a category error, when it is EXACTLY the category of
things that are supposed to be give (via representation) to it.
You don't really care so I won't bother to explain it again.
On 7/22/2025 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/22/25 9:56 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/22/2025 5:51 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-21 14:07:27 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/21/2025 4:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-20 15:04:34 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/20/2025 3:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-19 14:59:41 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/19/2025 4:02 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-07-18 22:11:50 +0000, Mr Flibble said:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a >>>>>>>>>>>> category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a >>>>>>>>>>>>
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a
simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year >>>>>>>>>>>> ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined >>>>>>>>>>> is a category
error and I stated it in this forum.
Indeed you stated that but failed to identify the actual
error. You
did not say which word in the problem statement is wrong or >>>>>>>>>> what is
the wrong category or what would be the right one.
I conclusively proved the actual category error yet
people that are only interested in rebuttal want no
part of any proof that I am correct.
Is it the same error as Flibble found?
Flibble's category error is stated abstractly.
My version is stated concretely.
Could you post a pointer to your version?
The category error is a type mismatch error where
a Turing Machine decider is required to report on
the behavior of a directly executed machine yet
cannot take a directly executed machine as an input.
That is not a category error. A category error is a word or phrase
of some category in a context that requires a word or phrase of a
different category.
The category error is the mistake of assuming that
a directly executing Turing machine is in the category
of input to a Turing machine halt decider.
How is that a category error, when it is EXACTLY the category of
things that are supposed to be give (via representation) to it.
The category error is typically stated indirectly by
requiring a Turing machine based halt decider to report
on the behavior of a directly executed Turing machine.
WHich is what it needs to do,
It can be easily corrected by changing the requirement
to report on the behavior that its finite string input
specifies.
WHich *IS* the behavior of the directed executed machine.
All you are doing is admitting to lying by putting forward a strawman.
You seem to assume you are allowed to change the rules of the system
and still be in the system.
Sorry, that just shows you utter ignorance of the rules of logic.
*I have conclusively proven that these behaviors diverge*
That people cannot understand this proof does not mean that
it is not a proof.
Nope, all you have conclusively proven is that you don't understand
the meaning of the words you are using.
Both of the best two chatbots were also surprised that
I proved that a correct simulation does not match the
direct execution when the input calls its own simulator.
All four of them immediately understood that DDD correctly
simulated by any HHH cannot possibly reach its own "return"
instruction final halt state.
Since you can't actually connect your words to correct usage of the
accepted definitions of the words, and the accepted principles of the
filed, you are just showing you are just lying.
You are the only liar here.
Am Wed, 23 Jul 2025 16:08:51 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/23/2025 3:56 PM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 23 Jul 2025 15:14:35 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/23/2025 2:06 PM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 23 Jul 2025 09:24:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/23/2025 8:31 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 23 Jul 2025 07:22:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
If HHH(DDD) never aborts its simulation then this HHH never stopsThat you don't understand my code is ot a rebuttal. HHH simulate DDDThe actual behavior that is actually specified must include that in >>>>>> both of these cases recursive simulation is specified. We can't just >>>>>> close our eyes and pretend otherwise.That is what HHH does: close its eyes and pretend that DDD called a
pure simulator instead of recursing. See below.
that calls HHH(DDD) that causes the directly executed HHH to simulate
itself simulating DDD until this simulated simulated DDD calls a
simulated simulated HHH(DDD).
Of course, and then it incorrectly assumes that an unaborted simulation
*of this HHH*, which does in fact abort, wouldn't abort.
running.
If HHH (which aborts) was given to a UTM/pure simulator, it would
stop running.
On 7/18/2025 5:11 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:01:31 -0500, olcott wrote:
Claude.ai agrees that the halting problem as defined is a category
error.
https://claude.ai/share/0b784d2a-447e-441f-b3f0-a204fa17135a
This can only be directly seen within my notion of a simulating halt
decider. I used the Linz proof as my basis.
Sorrowfully Peter Linz passed away 2 days less than one year ago on my
Mom's birthday July 19, 2024.
I was the first to state that the halting problem as defined is a
category
error and I stated it in this forum.
/Flibble
That seems correct to me and a very apt insight.
Professor Hehner wrote a paper on a similar idea
yet did not use the very apt term "category error".
The use of this term makes the issue much more clear.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,064 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 150:04:50 |
| Calls: | 13,691 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 186,936 |
| D/L today: |
438 files (115M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,410,972 |