Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Simulation vs. Execution in the Halting Problem
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 14:14:54 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <102ckje$25dg0$2@dont-email.me>
References: <yU0_P.1529838$4AM6.776697@fx17.ams4>
 <101uaha$25sfi$1@dont-email.me> <101v4bc$2c1iv$2@dont-email.me>
 <1020sak$2u1is$1@dont-email.me> <1021g55$3327l$1@dont-email.me>
 <10236jr$3lqbg$1@dont-email.me> <10237ki$3lo0a$1@dont-email.me>
 <1028lsi$13r5p$1@dont-email.me> <1029nr5$1ah2f$11@dont-email.me>
 <102bgc0$1soug$1@dont-email.me> <102c3bn$20jl4$8@dont-email.me>
 <22806dcceb8dbd965792253ecfde0a7f4dc5c793.camel@gmail.com>
 <102c4g1$20jl4$12@dont-email.me>
 <b27d3b8f4040ac88721a7b772f675f9e1cbb2c03.camel@gmail.com>
 <102c5nb$21qj7$2@dont-email.me>
 <602d915e3a80042ddac7f05fb389837ce3cefc12.camel@gmail.com>
 <102c7dj$226jq$1@dont-email.me>
 <0373fc8c6462341f655385edf6d4a0664a35981d.camel@gmail.com>
 <102ca1c$22pmt$1@dont-email.me>
 <85f876c4db96fb776dabc80c4208feed6aabc76d.camel@gmail.com>
 <102cdon$23jal$1@dont-email.me>
 <2e40a87aeb9e28ce23b5ebf3fcbf23dad6728a9b.camel@gmail.com>
 <102cg6f$246h5$1@dont-email.me>
 <822e204898d419545ca400a9088970f0b6a5107f.camel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:14:55 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c5844607f8c5789cdff36a135feed3c9";
	logging-data="2274816"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Bn6gk+w1tsGijD3245XTR"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y0DGNBeQegLu8/H3vl6D9e6Uc3E=
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <822e204898d419545ca400a9088970f0b6a5107f.camel@gmail.com>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250611-4, 6/11/2025), Outbound message

On 6/11/2025 1:25 PM, wij wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 12:59 -0500, olcott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes all other people (especially Dennis Bush) are saying
>>>> that H(D) is required to report on the behavior of the
>>>> direct execution of D() never noticing that this stupidly
>>>> requires H(D) to report on the behavior of its caller.
>>>
>>> If the H above means the H that the HP refers to. The H is required to
>>> report its argument's behavior (ie. by H(D)). But NOT required by simulation.
>>
>> It turns out that no one ever noticed that simulating halt
>> deciders nullify the HP counter-example input in that this
>> input cannot possibly reach its contradictory part.
>>
>>> The HP does not care what D does (simply to say).
>>>
>>
>> Everyone says that H(D) must re[port on the behavior of
>> the direct execution of D().
> 
> That is what the HP asks.
> 
>>> The HP only requires: H(D)==1 iff D() halts
>>>
>>>
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>     D(); // calls H(D)
>> }
>>
>> Which requires H(D) to report on the behavior of its
>> caller instead of reporting on the behavior that its
>> input actually specifies.
> 
> That is no problem. H does not care what D does inside (simply to say).
> The HP simply asks for a H that "H(D)==1 iff D() halts".
> 

Which requires H to report on something that it cannot possibly see.

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