| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<100aq31$i785$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Mike Terry Proves --- How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly met Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 15:03:45 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 80 Message-ID: <100aq31$i785$1@dont-email.me> References: <1005jsk$3akrk$1@dont-email.me> <bc6f0f045212bdfb7f7d883426873a09e37789ea@i2pn2.org> <1005u6v$3cpt2$1@dont-email.me> <1006oi9$3l93f$1@dont-email.me> <1007kan$3qb7l$8@dont-email.me> <1009n2d$b9ol$1@dont-email.me> <100ag73$g1r8$1@dont-email.me> <5e74cbdfefedc49bf713bbcc8c1b978c3e01f989@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 22:03:45 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6ea8251727358be87ec7627194d1f4d0"; logging-data="597253"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+tRPPRfJpYGtWlRxMaVrRH" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:IewDwdoatS5wBYEfkAi6a8QLtCE= In-Reply-To: <5e74cbdfefedc49bf713bbcc8c1b978c3e01f989@i2pn2.org> Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250517-6, 5/17/2025), Outbound message Bytes: 4772 On 5/17/2025 2:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/17/25 1:15 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 5/17/2025 5:06 AM, Mikko wrote: >>> On 2025-05-16 15:07:03 +0000, olcott said: >>> >>>> On 5/16/2025 2:13 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>> On 2025-05-15 23:43:27 +0000, olcott said: >>>>> >>>>>> On 5/15/2025 6:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>> On 5/15/25 4:47 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> I overcome the proof of undecidability of the Halting >>>>>>>> Problem in that the code that >>>>>>>> "does the opposite of whatever value that HHH returns" >>>>>>>> becomes unreachable to DD correctly simulated by HHH. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nope, only to youtr INCORRECTLY simuated by HHH. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In other words you believe that professor Sipser >>>>>> screwed up when he agreed with these exact words. >>>>>> >>>>>> <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> >>>>> >>>>> One may indeed thik so. Or pehaps he knew what he was doing but >>>>> cheated. >>>>> To sincerely agree with you without extreme care is an error. >>>> >>>> On 5/14/2025 7:36 PM, Mike Terry wrote: >>>> > There is a natural (and correct) statement that Sipser >>>> > is far more likely (I'd say) to have agreed to. >>> >>> That is compatible with the idea that Sipser scewed up or cheated. >>> >>>> > First you should understand the basic idea behind a >>>> > "Simulating Halt Decider" (*SHD*) that /partially/ >>>> > simulates its input, while observing each simulation >>>> > step looking for certain halting/non-halting patterns >>>> > in the simulation. A simple (working) example here >>>> > is an input which goes into a tight loop. >>>> (Mike says much more about this) >>>> >>>> *Click here to get the whole article* >>>> https://al.howardknight.net/? >>>> STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3C1003cu5%242p3g1%241%40dont-email.me%3E >>>> >>>> Message-ID: <1003cu5$2p3g1$1@dont-email.me> >>> >>> There he explains an error in your claim to meet the requirements that >>> Professor Sipser agreed. >>> >>> He also shows that your "In other words you believe that professor >>> Sipser screwed up when he agreed with these exact words" is not >>> supported by evidence (but that is quite obvious anyway). >>> >> >> *That is fully addressed in my reply to Mike* >> On 5/17/2025 10:31 AM, olcott wrote: >> [How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly >> met --- Mike my best reviewer] >> >> Message-ID: <100aa5c$f19u$1@dont-email.me> >> https://al.howardknight.net/? >> STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3C100aa5c%24f19u%241%40dont-email.me%3E >> > > WHich just shows that you don't understand what he is doing, You must reply to the other post or you bypass the context that proves you wrong. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer