Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly
 met
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 16:54:08 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 86
Message-ID: <1002vtf$2mbr6$5@dont-email.me>
References: <vvte01$14pca$29@dont-email.me> <vvte62$15ceh$18@dont-email.me>
 <100161e$2aia0$1@dont-email.me>
 <7efda98e7a36e4370b23e347b329469498383b19@i2pn2.org>
 <1002eav$2i4bk$17@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 22:54:08 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="794812149fd3df87a1483ec84874242e";
	logging-data="2830182"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19eSfaI3G2GInEJnLS9IT9M"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8NQ/8YsJqo3LjA2NB4WKyE+tfbI=
In-Reply-To: <1002eav$2i4bk$17@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 5/14/2025 11:54 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/14/2025 6:01 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/14/25 12:26 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/12/2025 1:20 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 5/12/2025 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 is not what you thought he agreed to:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> People tried for more than a year to get away with
>>> saying the 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*
>>>
>>> *My reviewers have been dishonest about all of these things*
>>>
>>
>> No, YOU are the one that has been dishonest, and have so admitted it, 
>> just using words you don't understand what they meant.
>>
>> Since your HHH and DDD are not program, 
> 
> The spec never requires that either H or D be a program.
> Termination analyzers are applied to C functions.
> 
> <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
> 
> 

And *yet again* you lie by implying Sipser agrees with your 
interpretation of the above when definitive proof has been repeatedly 
provided that he did not:

On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
 > I exchanged emails with him about this. He does not agree with anything
 > substantive that PO has written. I won't quote him, as I don't have
 > permission, but he was, let's say... forthright, in his reply to me.


Your dishonesty knows no bounds.