I don't know and I don't care. Changing the subject is no form of rebuttal. // The following is written in C // 01 typedef int (*ptr)(); // pointer to...
The whole halting problem proof depends on some input D that does the opposite of whatever Boolean value that H returns. Changing the names does not c...
It is equally a logical impossible for any CAD system to correctly draw a square circle. The inability to do the logically impossible never places any...
That Carol's question contradicts every yes/no answer that Carol can provide <is> isomorphic to input D to decider H that does that opposite of whatev...
By skimming the paper to contrive some excuse for rebuttal you missed this: The bottom line of all of the above reasoning is that it is agreed that th...
Self Referential Undecidability Construed as Incorrect Questions https://philpapers.org/archive/OLCSRU.pdf Has been reviewed by Professor Hehner and c...
Although this forum has by far the very best people of any forum that I have ever participated in I still have to put checks and balances into the dia...
So in other words you think that a Turing machine halt decider might reply: "I don't know let me think about it?" The thought experiment must stipulat...
In other words you do not understand that it is an incorrect question. We go back one more step. Do you understand why this is not true or false? "Thi...
We need to go back to more basic things. Do you understand why this question has no correct answer? The question is: >>>Is this sentence true: "This s...
I am just saying that when diagonalisation is evaluating {epistemological antinomies} it always makes sure to ignore all of the details. It never even...
Only because when I make a correct point you simply ignore rather than acknowledge it. I form a perfect incorrect question and then you change the wor...
Not when we are mathematically mapping Carol's question to an input D to a halt decider H that does the opposite of whatever Boolean value that H retu...
That simply changes the subject away from an input deriving a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for a specific decider. The most favorite reb...
The reason why the halting problem is not solvable is that its specification does not forbid self-contradictory questions. When we change the specific...
{epistemological antinomy} is the end all be all of why for these things. Professor Hehner calls this exact same idea {inconsistent specification} and...
We can map every real to an integer and it does seem that we have some reals left over. If we imagine that there can be such a thing as immediately ad...
Not at all and now I show my words are sustained by Gödel's words. The last paragraph is proven by all that comes before it. My unique take on Gödel 1...
Not at all. Diagonalization only shows THAT an expression is unprovable, it abstracts away WHY. If we were to formalize this question: "What time is i...
Yes this makes it exactly the same as the halting problem's input D that does the opposite of whatever Boolean value that decider H says. Since the an...
Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this question? Was written by a PhD computer science professor as an analogy to the conventional halting problem pr...
Her answer of "no" indicates that she cannot correctly answer "no" yet because "no" is the correct answer her answer of "no" is incorrect. Can Carol c...
In other words Gödel uses a convolulted mess to show THAT G IS unprovable in F in F while carefully hiding WHY G is unprovable in F. Antinomy It is a ...
The reason that there is no proof of G in F (everyone always make sure to ignore the reason) is that to prove there is no proof G in F requires a sequ...
Yes he does and he does it in a ridiculously convoluted way because Peano Arithematic is woefully inexpressive for this task. G := (F ? G) is a propos...
"This sentence is not true." is not a truth bearer and thus cannot be true or false. "What time is it?" is also not a truth bearer. Yes that is the sa...
I never said anything like that. That is merely contradictory and thus not at all self-contradictory. "This sentence is not true." is self contradicto...
A more formal account is probably beyond the technical capability of most here. This D is defined to do the opposite of whatever Boolean value that H ...
When Carol says "no" indicating that "no" is an incorrect answer this makes "no" the correct answer thus not incorrect thus Carol is wrong. The exact ...
When input D is defined to do the opposite of whatever value that decider H returns then "Does your input halt on its input?" becomes a self-contradic...
As I and Professor Hehner have said the halting problem specification is essentially a self-contradictory thus incorrect question for some decider/inp...
Yes that is the article that I am basing this on. Professor Hehner totally agrees with my understanding of his work. We discussed it as recently as ye...
Because is has the exact same form as the halting problem: decider/input pair it proves that the most important computer science theorem that exists i...
Carol's question was written by a PhD computer science professor as a simple analogy to the halting problem proofs. It was written to provide a rebutt...
It <is> the lack of a correct answer thus Can Carol correctly answer “no” to this question? has (a) yes (b) no (c) anything else as not a correct answ...
So Carol's question when posed to Carol meets the definition of an incorrect question in that both answers from the solution set of {yes, no} are the ...
Someone did find a loophole in Carol's question, it is corrected below: (Carol could answer with a word that is synonymous with no) Can Carol correctl...
I honestly can't see how your above statement can possibly be correct and you have not provided a correct version of my statement to contrast with. Yo...
That is great. (a) Carol answers "no" and she is wrong. (b) Carol answers "yes" and she is wrong. (c) Carol does anything else and she has not provide...
It is clear that self-contradictory expressions are untrue and unfalse because they are self-contradictory. Analogous reasoning applies to self-contra...
That seems to be a ridiculous statement on your part. It is like you are saying that it is impossible to determine whether or not an elephant is a fif...
When the solution set is restricted to {yes, no} and no element of this solution set is a correct answer from Carol then the question posed to Carol i...
The PhD computer science professor that has been published in several highly esteemed computer science journals disagrees. (a) Yes is not a correct an...
"Is the living mammal of an elephant any type of fifteen story office building?" has the correct answer of "no". Is the following sentence true or fal...
Comments