Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!us1.netnews.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --self-evident truth-- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:23:39 -0700 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 04:23:42 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2472003"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 21858 Lines: 420 On 3/18/24 8:53 PM, olcott wrote: > On 3/18/2024 9:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/18/24 2:48 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/18/2024 4:38 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 22:18 schreef olcott: >>>>> On 3/18/2024 4:11 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 21:40 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 3:30 PM, immibis wrote: >>>>>>>> On 18/03/24 21:20, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 2:44 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 18:43 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 10:11 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 15:44 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 1:04 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:22 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 12:11 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 9:42 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 11:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 9:00 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:32 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 8:14 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 9:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 4:27 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:37 PM, immibis wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/03/24 14:11, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 10:04 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 9:42 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 11:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 9:13 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 10:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 7:52 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 9:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 5:50 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 7:21 PM, Richard Damon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 8:29 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/2024 11:29 PM, Richard >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 8:45 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(D,D) fails to make the required >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mistake of reporting on what it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does not see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But it DOES make a mistake, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because it does answer the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question correctly. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are just PROVING you think >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lying is ok. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You TOTALLY don't understand the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning of truth. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are REALLY just a Pathological >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Liar, as you have no concept of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> real truth, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The original halt status criteria >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has the impossible requirement >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that H(D,D) must report on behavior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that it does not actually see. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Requiring H to be clairvoyant is an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unreasonable requirement. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *The criteria shown below eliminate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the requirement of clairvoyance* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) 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 correctly simulates its input D >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Means H does a correct partial >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation of D until H correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matches the recursive simulation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-halting behavior pattern. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But turning out to be impposible, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't make it incorrect or invalid. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *You seems to be ridiculously >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> disingenuous about the self-evident >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> truth* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For every possible way that H can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> encoded and D(D) calls H(D,D) either >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(D,D) aborts its simulation or D(D) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never stops running. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you are incredably stupid to not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see this doesn't prove what you need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it to. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, if you define H to not abort, the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we get a non-haltig D(D), but H >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't answwer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, if you define H to abort, then, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We see that you changed the subject >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away from: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criteria] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H is an algorithm that simulates its >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input and correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determines whether or not it needs to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abort this simulation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is all that this thread's H does. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And what defines "Need"? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is the set of every implementation of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its spec: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) H(D,D) Simulate input. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Determine if it needs to stop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulating its input to prevent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the simulated D(D) from never halting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus not a specific algorithm? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, HOW do you determine NEED? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not an algorithmic step. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can only verify that in retrospect. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you fully understand the spec? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I think not the way you do. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To me, for H to NEED to abort its simulation, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that means that when giving the input to a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct simulator, that simulator will not halt. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes that is correct. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have just proven that H doesn't need abort >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its simulation and the abort decision is incorrect. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The head games of a Troll. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For every possible way that H can be encoded and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D(D) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calls H(D,D) either H(D,D) aborts its simulation >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or D(D) ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========