From Newsgroup: comp.theory

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed
Jun 6, 2004, 9:11:19 AM https://groups.google.com/g/sci.logic/c/V7wzVvx8IMw/m/ggPE6a-60cUJ

*21 years of additional work later*

Halting Problem Proof Counter-Example is Isomorphic to the Liar Paradox https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398375553_Halting_Problem_Proof_Counter-Example_is_Isomorphic_to_the_Liar_Paradox

On 6/6/2004 9:11 AM, Peter Olcott wrote:

One very simple transformation of the problem into a solvable problem
is to convert the Boolean function DoesItHalt() into a tertiary response: True, False, Neither.

if (DoesItHalt() == True)
while(True) // loop forever
;
else if (DoesItHalt() == False)
return False;

else if (DoesItHalt() == NeitherTrueNorFalse)
return NeitherTrueNorFalse;

So the original Halting Problem was incorrectly formed specifically
because it was framed as a Boolean function, thus failing to account
for possible inputs that result in a reply other than True or False.

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.

This required establishing a new foundation
for correct reasoning.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.theory

olcott kirjoitti 5.12.2025 klo 18.36:

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed
Jun 6, 2004, 9:11:19 AM https://groups.google.com/g/sci.logic/c/V7wzVvx8IMw/m/ggPE6a-60cUJ

There is nothing incorrect in Turing's problem formulation. TUring's
intent was not to pose problems but siimply to prove that for certain
types of questions there is not complete method to find the answer.
That does not prevent to find the answer for particular questions or
having partial methods that find answers in many cases.

Note that on the page the link above points to there are comments that
point out a major error in OP.

In addition, it does not make nuch sense to say that some problem
is incorrectly formed without quoting the problem that is claimed
to be incorrectly formed.
--
Mikko
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.theory

On 12/6/2025 2:21 AM, Mikko wrote:

olcott kirjoitti 5.12.2025 klo 18.36:

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed
Jun 6, 2004, 9:11:19 AM
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.logic/c/V7wzVvx8IMw/m/ggPE6a-60cUJ

There is nothing incorrect in Turing's problem formulation. TUring's

Failing to find a mistake my proof counts as
not any rebuttal what-so-ever.

Halting Problem Proof Counter-Example is Isomorphic to the Liar Paradox https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398375553_Halting_Problem_Proof_Counter-Example_is_Isomorphic_to_the_Liar_Paradox

intent was not to pose problems but siimply to prove that for certain
types of questions there is not complete method to find the answer.
That does not prevent to find the answer for particular questions or
having partial methods that find answers in many cases.

Note that on the page the link above points to there are comments that
point out a major error in OP.

In addition, it does not make nuch sense to say that some problem
is incorrectly formed without quoting the problem that is claimed
to be incorrectly formed.

--
Copyright 2025 Olcott

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.

This required establishing a new foundation
for correct reasoning.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.theory

olcott kirjoitti 6.12.2025 klo 14.22:

On 12/6/2025 2:21 AM, Mikko wrote:

olcott kirjoitti 5.12.2025 klo 18.36:

Alan Turing's Halting Problem is incorrectly formed
Jun 6, 2004, 9:11:19 AM
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.logic/c/V7wzVvx8IMw/m/ggPE6a-60cUJ

There is nothing incorrect in Turing's problem formulation. TUring's

Failing to find a mistake my proof counts as
not any rebuttal what-so-ever.

Failing to find a mistake in Turing's halting problem counts as
not any rebuttal what-so-ever.

And so does failing to find Turing's halting problem.
--
Mikko
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2