Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly
 met --- WDH
Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 19:41:23 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <1000orj$245as$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vvte01$14pca$29@dont-email.me>
 <fceb852a146ff7238c5be7a0adf420474a8fb5df@i2pn2.org>
 <vvuc7a$1deu5$5@dont-email.me>
 <c5a47349d8625838f1ee2782c216e0ebf9223bc6@i2pn2.org>
 <vvuj6l$1j6s0$3@dont-email.me> <vvvalk$1p49q$4@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 02:41:24 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1b4c815c0318038d25de37dcdc1ad225";
	logging-data="2233692"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+EG3leBlflPifDqCLK1sB+"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wdHyP3/E98VkxkHmKghZUeii0rI=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250513-6, 5/13/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <vvvalk$1p49q$4@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

On 5/13/2025 6:33 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 13.mei.2025 om 06:52 schreef olcott:
>> On 5/12/2025 11:05 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/12/25 10:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2025 8:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/12/25 2:17 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>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which your H doesn't do, as it can not correctly determine what 
>>>>> doesn't happen.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any C programmer can correctly tell what doesn't happen.
>>>> What doesn't happen is DD reaching its "return" statement
>>>> final halt state.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure they can, since that is the truth, as explained.
>>>
>>> Since your "logic" is based on lies and equivocation, 
>>
>> If my logic was based on lies and equivocation
>> then you could provide actual reasoning that
>> corrects my errors.
> 
> That has been done hundreths of times.
> 
>>
>> It is truism that simulating termination analyzers
>> must report on the behavior of their input as if
>> they themselves never aborted this simulation:
> 
> One of the things that have been shown to you to be wrong.
> Repeating it can be interpreted as lying.
> The report must be about the behaviour specified in the input, including 
> the code to abort, not about the behaviour specified in a hypothetical 
> other HHH that does not abort
> 

A simulating termination analyzer according to this exact spec

<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>

Derives the exact same behavior as the directly executed D()
except in the case where D calls H(D). The traditional way to
handle this case is: *I GIVE UP I HAVE NO IDEA* That is *NOT*
the best of all possible ways to handle that case.


-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer