Re: The simple essence of Proof Theoretic Semantics

On 06/07/2026 18:33, olcott wrote:
> On 7/6/2026 3:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 04/07/2026 20:01, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2026 2:55 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 03/07/2026 21:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/3/2026 1:27 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/3/2026 2:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/3/2026 12:10 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ignoring the input IS NOT A MAPPING
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A mapping is nothing more than an association of inputs to outputs, 
>>>>> int Not_A_Mapping(int X)
>>>>> {
>>>>>    return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> By construing that as a mapping is one of the screw-ups
>>>>> that prevents true expressed in language from being computable.
>>>>
>>>> By construing the above mapping as a non-mapping you disconnect from
>>>> Common Languge and lose your ablility to communicate.
>>>
>>> I will not tolerate that math hijacks the term
>>> "mapping" to ignore requirement that there must
>>> be some actual correspondence between inputs and
>>> outputs.
>>
>> Your exceesive intolerance is irrelevant. 
> 
> It makes terms-of-the-art into damned liars.

No, your excessive intolerance does not do that.

-- 
Mikko