Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly
 met
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 07:27:17 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <0754c526b05716e5e562dba291033f9be50e7109@i2pn2.org>
References: <vvte01$14pca$29@dont-email.me> <10013fp$2a1j4$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 11:46:39 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="313410"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
In-Reply-To: <10013fp$2a1j4$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3694
Lines: 70

On 5/13/25 11:42 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/12/2025 1:17 PM, olcott wrote:
>> Introduction to the Theory of Computation 3rd Edition
>> by Michael Sipser (Author)
>> 4.4 out of 5 stars    568 rating
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael-Sipser/ 
>> dp/113318779X
>>
>> int DD()
>>   {
>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>    if (Halt_Status)
>>      HERE: goto HERE;
>>    return Halt_Status;
>>   }
>>
>> DD correctly simulated by any pure simulator
>> named HHH cannot possibly terminate thus proving
>> that this criteria has been met:
>>
>> <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>
>>
> 
> People tried for more than a year to get away with saying
> that DDD was not emulated by HHH correctly until I stipulated
> that DDD is emulated by HHH according to the rules of the
> x86 language. Then they shut up about this.
> 
> People tried to get away with saying that HHH
> cannot not decide halting on the basis of
> *simulated D would never stop running unless aborted*
> until I pointed out that those exact words are in the spec.
> 
> People tried to get away with saying that the correct
> emulation of a non-halting input cannot be partial
> Yet partial simulation is right in the spec:
> *H correctly simulates its input D until*
> 
> 

Right, "Correct Simulations" can never be partial.

Partial Simulations can be partial.

Deciders can use Partial Simulations, if they do it correctly.

But to do so, they need to show that the ACTUAL CORRECT SIMULATION of 
this EXACT input, which needs to represent a PROGRAM, would never halt.

Since your DDD as defined isn't a program, you just error out on a 
category error.

If we fix that by including HHH into the code, then your HHH errors out 
by not correctly determining what the correct simulation of the exact 
input (which calls the HHH that does the abort, since that is what you 
ended up using) which will halt.

All you are doing is just proving that you are nothing but a 
pathological liar that doesn't know, and can't learn, the meaning of the 
words you use.

Sorry, but you have sunk your own battleship by basing your "logic" on 
your lies, and refusing to learn the meaning of the words you use.