You don't seem to understand these things very well do you?Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2020 11:38 pm1. On the basis of you saying so.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2020 11:37 pm On what basis could you possibly justify the presumption that I am handling the counter-examples on a case by case basis?
2. If you had a universal solution you would've published the source code by now.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2020 10:39 pm What I have accomplished is deriving the complete encoding (written in x86 machine language) of a halt decider that decides halting for the set of halting problem counter-examples as defined by the Peter Linz H_Hat.
Ohhh. You have an actual infinite set of Turing Machines? Show it to me!PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Tue Mar 03, 2020 11:37 pm The Peter Linz H_Hat is a template that species an infinite set of Turing Machine descriptions.
If I were to write a computer program that could perform any arithmetic computation:
{-,+,*,/} a single program would function across an infinite set of pairs on input strings.
I could provide the program and you could see that it would do this.
You are also asking for the infinite set of strings input. That is ridiculous.