Re: The simple essence of Proof Theoretic Semantics
dbush <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | sci.logic,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.math |
|---|---|
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/3/2026 12:52 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 7/3/2026 10:50 AM, dbush wrote:
>> On 7/3/2026 11:36 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2026 4:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 02/07/2026 17:51, olcott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know enough about C to understand that
>>>>> dbush example was foolish nonsense when proposed
>>>>> to show the halting problem counter-example?
>>>>
>>>> It is a valid example of a C program. It was present as a part of a
>>>> claim about you, and your response was the false claim that "That
>>>> is just nonsense". Later in the discussion you offer more evidence
>>>> to support his claim.
>>>>
>>>
>>> His halt decider did not look at its input.
>>
>> Nor is it required to. All it needs to do is map inputs to outputs.
>>
>
> So a piece of metal sitting on the ground is an automobile.
Does algorithm H map machine description X and machine input Y to an
output of either 0 or 1?
Yes?
Then it meets the prerequisites to be a halt decider. If you disagree,
explain in detail why.
>
>>> His input merely halted and did not call
>>> this halt decider.
>>
>> C function D doesn't need to call C function H.
>
> You said that it was an example of the HP counter-example input.
Yes, because algorithm D was built by the counter-example template to
make algorithm H get the wrong answer.
If you disagree, explain in detail why the above is wrong.
> That was counter-factual. If you keep making these "mistakes"
> I will quit looking at anything that you say. Your insight
> into Q seems to prove that these "mistakes" are intentional.
I assure you there is no mistake or "mistake". You just don't yet
understand the point I'm making.
>
> Maybe you are good at math and totally clueless about programming?
>
>> Algorithm D used algorithm H as part of it, meaning algorithm D used
>> the template to cause algorithm H to get the wrong answer for it.
>>
>>> He used {} in a way that
>>> made no sense in C.
>>>
>>
>> It was a logical grouping so you can see how algorithm H is part of
>> algorithm D.
>
>