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 --- Mike EVIDENCE
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 10:21:34 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 260
Message-ID: <10319tu$3u901$8@dont-email.me>
References: <yU0_P.1529838$4AM6.776697@fx17.ams4>
 <101nk9j$7qau$7@dont-email.me> <101os21$mg8a$1@dont-email.me>
 <101pqge$ta6v$5@dont-email.me> <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> <102e21p$2ipl5$1@dont-email.me>
 <102er6u$2ohps$4@dont-email.me> <102h3gg$3e0g0$1@dont-email.me>
 <102hgi3$3gqbm$4@dont-email.me> <102jm6c$5f8r$1@dont-email.me>
 <102ju9i$793t$2@dont-email.me> <102m5ia$r98h$1@dont-email.me>
 <102mpib$uef9$15@dont-email.me> <102ov42$1jli0$1@dont-email.me>
 <102pqpi$1r1h4$1@dont-email.me> <102rdtq$29lrc$1@dont-email.me>
 <102rsm6$2doc9$3@dont-email.me> <102u3p4$31q0f$3@dont-email.me>
 <102ujiu$369b2$3@dont-email.me> <1030jtf$3pfos$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 17:21:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="030154485115acd58dbc4da32e6ee0de";
	logging-data="4137985"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX187L72B1rmzHqWAPFs7Tv4M"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MSzSdMdmjE7gEB145XG19YOIlvQ=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <1030jtf$3pfos$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250619-2, 6/19/2025), Outbound message

On 6/19/2025 4:05 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 18.jun.2025 om 16:47 schreef olcott:
>> On 6/18/2025 5:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 17.jun.2025 om 16:04 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/17/2025 4:52 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 16.jun.2025 om 21:20 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/16/2025 6:28 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-06-15 15:40:59 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/15/2025 4:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-14 13:43:13 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/2025 6:25 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-13 15:36:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/13/2025 6:53 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-12 15:19:58 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/2025 3:10 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-11 14:20:39 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/11/2025 3:56 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-10 16:51:49 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/10/2025 2:12 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-08 05:38:26 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/8/2025 12:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-07 13:51:33 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/2025 3:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-06 16:17:48 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/2025 3:57 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-04 15:59:10 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/4/2025 2:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-06-03 20:00:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/3/2025 12:59 PM, wij wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2025-06-03 at 16:38 +0100, Mike 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/06/2025 13:45, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/2/2025 10:58 PM, Mike Terry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even if presented with /direct 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observations/ contradicting his 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> position, PO can (will) just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> invent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new magical thinking that only he is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> smart enough to understand, in order to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somehow justify his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> busted intuitions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My favorite is that the directly executed 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D(D) doesn't halt even though it looks 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like it does:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/24/24 19:18, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > The directly executed D(D) reaches a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final state and exits normally.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > BECAUSE ANOTHER ASPECT OF THE SAME 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> COMPUTATION HAS BEEN ABORTED,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > Thus meeting the correct non-halting 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criteria if any step of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > a computation must be aborted to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prevent its infinite execution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > then this computation DOES NOT HALT 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (even if it looks like it does).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right - magical thinking.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO simply cannot clearly think through 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what's going on, due to the multiple 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> levels involved. In his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> head they all become a mush of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confustions, but the mystery here is why 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO does not / realise/ that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> he can't think his way through it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I try something that's beyond me, I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon realise I'm not up to it.  Somehow PO 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tries, gets into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a total muddle, and concludes "My 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of this goes beyond that of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everybody else, due to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my powers of unrivalved concentration 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> equalled by almost nobody on the planet, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and my ability to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eliminate extraneous complexity".  How did 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PO ever start down this path of delusions? 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not that that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matters one iota... :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> People seem to keep addressing the logic of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the implement of POOH, but it does not 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> matter how
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H or D are implemented, because:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. POOH is not about the Halting Problem 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (no logical connection)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Likewise ZFC was not about what is now 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> called naive set theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To a large extent it is. Both are intended to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> describe those sets that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were tought to be usefult to think about. But 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the naive set theory failed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because it is inconsistent. However, ZF 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> excludes some sets that some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people want to consider, e.g., the universal 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set, Quine's atom. There is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no agreement whether do not satisfy the axiom 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of choice and its various
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consequences should be included or excluded, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so both ZF and ZFC are used.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quine's atom is nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it is not. It is a set that one can assume 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to exist or not to exist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urelement#Quine_atoms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is the same as every person that is their own 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> father.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it is not the same. Being of ones own father 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is impossible because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the say the material world works. Imaginary 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things like sets can be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined to work wichever way one wants to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagine, though a consitent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagination is more useful.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If that was true then one could imagine the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> coherent set of properties of a square circle.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One can, much like you can imagine the coherent set 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of properties of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an impossible decider.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *CAN'T POSSIBLY REACH A FINAL STATE DOES ESTABLISH 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NOT HALTING*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depends on what exactly your "can" and "possibly" 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean. Anyway, DDD does
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reach its final state, so its wrong to say that it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do people always have to be damned liars and change
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my words and then dishonestly apply their rebuttal to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these changed words.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you don't tell why you do so why would anyone else?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I USE CUT-AND-PASTE MAKING SURE THAT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MY WORDS ARE PERFECTLY UNCHANGED.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Putting them to a web page would achieve the same with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lesser effort.
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========