Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Ben fails to understand
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 11:06:56 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <v66hb0$2qr6f$5@dont-email.me>
References: <tic5tr$25uem$6@dont-email.me> <8735bpq5jh.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <v66bcq$2plrr$1@dont-email.me>
 <667d8d81cab22f1619657d4db28f52ffd5d3c2cc@i2pn2.org>
 <v66fq7$2q8ag$2@dont-email.me>
 <99e374c37feadfc0a36fec61f19b780a0de7a7e7@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2024 18:06:57 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8ec8ab09a9c087279b96ae2505557d8c";
	logging-data="2976975"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX180nfecIpRdyfhxijLOTXHQ"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rm8ti0+i+lMjijTGPS12545iOBQ=
In-Reply-To: <99e374c37feadfc0a36fec61f19b780a0de7a7e7@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3167

On 7/4/2024 11:05 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 7/4/24 11:40 AM, olcott wrote:
>> On 7/4/2024 10:14 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Thu, 04 Jul 2024 09:25:29 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 10/14/2022 7:44 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>>> Python <python@invalid.org> writes:
>>>>>>     [comment: as D halts, the simulation is faulty, Pr. Sipser has 
>>>>>> been
>>>>>>      fooled by Olcott shell game confusion "pretending to 
>>>>>> simulate" and
>>>>>>      "correctly simulate"]
>>>>> I don't think that is the shell game.  PO really /has/ an H (it's
>>>>> trivial to do for this one case) that correctly determines that P(P)
>>>>> *would* never stop running *unless* aborted.  He knows and accepts 
>>>>> that
>>>>> P(P) actually does stop.  The wrong answer is justified by what would
>>>>> happen if H (and hence a different P) where not what they actually 
>>>>> are.
>>> You seem to like this quote. Do you agree with it?
>>>
>>
>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
>>      until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
>>      stop running unless aborted then
>>
>>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>>
>> The first half of the quote agrees that the Sisper approved
>> criteria has been met, thus unless professor Sipser is wrong
>> H is correct to reject D as non-halting.
>>
> 
> Nope. Since you LIE about what Professor Sipser means by the first part, 
> you are shown to be just a stupid liar.
> 

Ben agreed that the first part has been met therefore
the second part <is> entailed.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer