Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_A_simulating_halt_decider_applied_to_the_The_Peter_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Linz_Turing_Machine_description_=E2=9F=A8=C4=A4=E2=9F=A9?= Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 20:03:04 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 92 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 03:03:05 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="458305845cd025bf1a433877c96321fe"; logging-data="3885479"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+gY1SHp266jdeXGoejU+NH" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:wffzoSryyPkTUNZPc+R2GnfAWjU= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 6142 On 5/26/2024 7:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/26/24 8:21 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 5/26/2024 7:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 5/26/24 7:45 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 5/26/2024 6:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 5/26/24 6:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 5/26/2024 3:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/26/24 3:14 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞ >>>>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> When we see that ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by embedded_H in an >>>>>>>> infinite number of steps cannot possibly reach its own simulated >>>>>>>> final state of ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ and halt then we correctly deduce that the >>>>>>>> same thing applies when simulating halt decider embedded_H >>>>>>>> correctly >>>>>>>> simulates less than an infinite number of steps of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nope. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since we are talking about Turing Machines, your stipulated POOP >>>>>>> definitions go away, >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.liarparadox.org/Linz_Proof.pdf >>>>>> *Simplified the notation for Ĥ on the top of page three* >>>>>> and put back in the qy state shown in figure 12.2 >>>>>> >>>>>> When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞ >>>>>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn >>>>>> >>>>>>    Ĥ copies its own Turing machine description: ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>>>>>    then invokes embedded_H that simulates ⟨Ĥ⟩ with ⟨Ĥ⟩ as input. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is an easily verified fact that ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by >>>>>> embedded_H cannot possibly reach its own simulated final state of >>>>>> ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ in any finite sequence of steps. >>>>> >>>>> Nope, since we are in Turing Machines, the term "Correctly >>>>> Simulated" means, and can ONLY mean, the resuts of a UTM >>>>> simulation, which BY DEFINITION is nopt aborted. >>>> >>>> You always seem to make sure respond to a different set of words >>>> than the words I actually said. This could be an honest mistake. >>>> >>>> *I SAID A CORRECT SIMULATION OF A FINITE NUMBER OF STEPS* >>> >>> No you didn't, not the last time. >>> >>> You said (H^) H^) correctly simulated by embbeded_H cannot ..." >>> >>> If embedded_H does a "Correct Simulation", then BY DEFINITION, it >>> never aborts. >>> >>> That it doesn't reach a final state in a finte number of steps, and >>> thus, that "Correct Simulation" was non-halting. >>> >>> (and your earlier statement tried to assert behavior of THIS H^ based >>> on the behaviof or a DIFFERENT H^ built on a diffferent embedded_H >>> with differet behaivor which is just unsound logic, as the two >>> machines are essentially unrelated as far as this behavior) >>> >>>> >>>> *WHEN I EXPLICITLY STATE A FINITE NUMBER OF STEPS THEN YOU ARE* >>>> *FLAT OUT WRONG TO SIMPLY ASSUME AN INFINITE NUMBER OF STEPS* >>> >>> Nope, you said it didn't reach a final state in a finite number of >>> steps, i.e the simulation is shown to be non-halting. >> >> *If you need to, reread that many times* >>  >>>> It is an easily verified fact that ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ correctly simulated by >>  >>>> embedded_H cannot possibly reach its own simulated final state of >>  >>>> ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ in any finite sequence of steps. > > Right, so if you claim embedded_H is actually DOING a "Correct > Simulation", then BY the DEFINITION of COMPUTATION THEORY, that is an > non-aborted simulation. > CORRECT SIMULATION OF A FINITE NUMBER OF STEPS CORRECT SIMULATION OF A FINITE NUMBER OF STEPS CORRECT SIMULATION OF A FINITE NUMBER OF STEPS UNLESS YOU CAN PROVE THAT A UTM CANNOT POSSIBLY BE ADAPTED TO COUNT THE NUMBER OF STEPS AND THEN STOP I AM CORRECT AND YOU ARE DISHONEST -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer