Thanks to my supporters Yuri, vinetor, Ali (UA-cam) and Bruno, Timmy, Micah (Patreon) for making this video possible! If you want to contribute, links are in the video description.
Put H in another program D which does the opposite of what H says. Then feed D it's own program which passes it to H. You have set up H for failure using a paradox.
So you assume A_tm is undecidable... That does not sound quite right to me. If "A_tm is undecidable" is a fact, your proof is completely correct, but you base it on a supposition. Proof by contradiction should be constructed based on facts and flip the argument that you want to prove wrong. This proof only shows 2 conclusions: either your supposition is incorrect, which A_tm is decidable, or HALT_tm is undecidable. The proof becomes meaningless unless you later prove A_tm is undecidable. (Edit: I noticed that your next video is the proof of A_tm, but it would complete the logic if you point it out at the end of this video.) Please clarify this, and please don't hesitate to point out any mistake I made. 😁
@@pedrogouveia3111 But isn't this video supposed to show why ATM is undecidable? I thought thats what the video was going to be about but instead it seems he is saying the halting problem is undecidable because we know the halting problem is undecidable
Thanks to my supporters Yuri, vinetor, Ali (UA-cam) and Bruno, Timmy, Micah (Patreon) for making this video possible! If you want to contribute, links are in the video description.
bruh what. "because it is" is a wild statement
Very intuitive proof, nice. I like it more than other approaches.
Put H in another program D which does the opposite of what H says. Then feed D it's own program which passes it to H. You have set up H for failure using a paradox.
That's a problem of program d not h. You can remove h, just have d by itself taking its output as input and the paradox (infine loop) already exists.
Nice explanation
Nice job
May Allah bless you with Islaam, this really was beneficial. Exam in a week :D
Ameen
So you assume A_tm is undecidable... That does not sound quite right to me. If "A_tm is undecidable" is a fact, your proof is completely correct, but you base it on a supposition. Proof by contradiction should be constructed based on facts and flip the argument that you want to prove wrong. This proof only shows 2 conclusions: either your supposition is incorrect, which A_tm is decidable, or HALT_tm is undecidable. The proof becomes meaningless unless you later prove A_tm is undecidable. (Edit: I noticed that your next video is the proof of A_tm, but it would complete the logic if you point it out at the end of this video.) Please clarify this, and please don't hesitate to point out any mistake I made. 😁
But ATM is undecidable. There is a proof for it…. It’s a fact
@@pedrogouveia3111 But isn't this video supposed to show why ATM is undecidable? I thought thats what the video was going to be about but instead it seems he is saying the halting problem is undecidable because we know the halting problem is undecidable