Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<3854dd6ef97e91fb695a96e911b6d9c531899a78.camel@gmail.com>

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: wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: HHH(DD) --- COMPUTE ACTUAL MAPPING FROM INPUT TO OUTPUT ---
 Using Finite String Transformations
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:49:07 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <3854dd6ef97e91fb695a96e911b6d9c531899a78.camel@gmail.com>
References: <vsnchj$23nrb$2@dont-email.me> <vto4vh$23i07$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vto7qu$267in$1@dont-email.me> <k%RLP.1232047$Xb1.539402@fx05.ams4>
	 <vtorpb$2uac$1@news.muc.de> <vtp32o$2vb5o$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vtqpt5$17ns$1@news.muc.de> <vtrhbc$16pbv$2@dont-email.me>
	 <vtrk7l$t44$1@news.muc.de> <vtrmfa$1be3n$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vtvkgo$vjvi$1@dont-email.me> <vu2042$34l74$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vu519u$1s5f9$1@dont-email.me> <vu6aha$2vn05$3@dont-email.me>
	 <vu6dk4$2fq2$1@news.muc.de> <vu6knm$394oo$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vu8cgm$2p5e$1@news.muc.de> <vu8gml$v0qa$2@dont-email.me>
	 <vu8m2h$vn9b$2@dont-email.me> <vu8pr1$13jl5$8@dont-email.me>
	 <vu8qo3$vn9b$4@dont-email.me> <vu8ruc$13jl5$12@dont-email.me>
	 <vuaaae$2lbp9$2@dont-email.me>
	 <zIWdnaZKufSzmpT1nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 18:49:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="697db67b62438c1830e7c4a3b8ddf89e";
	logging-data="3639294"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18m4CGPn1hlyLFQJfkwF1UK"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v4tf/XNWmRp4hzOuw9uItTXX0+Y=
In-Reply-To: <zIWdnaZKufSzmpT1nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Bytes: 7431

On Wed, 2025-04-23 at 16:28 +0100, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 23/04/2025 10:02, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> > Op 22.apr.2025 om 21:50 schreef olcott:
> > > On 4/22/2025 2:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> > > > Op 22.apr.2025 om 21:14 schreef olcott:
> > > > > On 4/22/2025 1:10 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> > > > > > Op 22.apr.2025 om 18:38 schreef olcott:
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > a function is computable if there exists an algorithm
> > > > > > > that can do the job of the function, i.e. given an input
> > > > > > > of the function domain it can return the corresponding output=
..
> > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > On Turing Machines inputs <are> finite strings, and
> > > > > > > finite string transformation rules <are> applied to
> > > > > > > these finite strings to derive corresponding outputs.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > And it has been proven that no finite string transformations ar=
e possible that report the=20
> > > > > > halting behaviour for all inputs that specify a correct program=
..=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
> > > > > Only when people stupid assume the same thing as
> > > > > sum(3,2) should return the sum of 5 + 3.
> > > > >=20
> > > > Therefore HHH should report on the actual input, the finite string =
that describes a halting=20
> > > > program. Not on the hypothetical input that does not halt, because =
it is based on a
> > > > hypothetical=20
> > > > HHH that does not abort.
> > > >=20
> > > > Why do you maintain that HHH should process the hypothetical input =
instead of the actual
> > > > input.
> > > > Do you really believe that 3+2 equals 5+3?
> > >=20
> > > I have proven that the directly executed DD and DD
> > > emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the
> > > x86 language have a different set of state changes
> > > many hundreds of times for several years.
> > You never showed a proof. You only repeated a dream. You are dreaming m=
any years without any
> > logic.=20
> > You failed to show the first state change where the direct execution is=
 different from the=20
> > simulation. You only showed an erroneous HHH that fails to reach the en=
d of the simulation of a=20
> > halting program.
>=20
> Worse than this, on more than one occasion I've actually posted traces of=
 computation DDD(DDD)=20
> executed directly and simulated by HHH side by side.=C2=A0 Both traces we=
re of course /identical/, up to=20
> the point where HHH stops simulating.=C2=A0 I even compared (but did not =
post) the /full/ traces=20
> including instructions outside of DDD which PO normally suppresses.=C2=A0=
 This makes the trace quite long
> - tens of thousands of entries as I recall - but as expected they were id=
entical line for line right
> up to the point where HHH aborts the trace.

HHH/DDD is invalid for the Halting Problem any way, nothing to do with 'cor=
rect'
(or incorrect) simulation.
Sadly, I can only see you alone understand why (others don't really underst=
and neither)

> This feature of computation, namely that every computation has exactly on=
e defined sequence of=20
> computation steps is perhaps THE most basic feature of computation, captu=
ring its essential notion.=20
> It's understood by students even before they turn up for the first lectur=
e introducing the=20
> definition of a TM.=C2=A0 I dare say it's understood by children who've n=
ever heard of a TM, but=20
> understand what an algorithm is, or broadly what a "computer program" is,=
 or who have sat through=20
> one of those school lessons where they are presented with a simple flow c=
hart to calculate
> something.
>=20
> PO seems unable to take this on board mentally.=C2=A0 I'd guess he unders=
tands at some level that if his=20
> claim that "the trace depends on who is doing the simulation" is revealed=
 as nonsense, then his=20
> claim that HHH is "correct" when it gives the wrong answer collapses, and=
 in fact must be viewed as=20
> laughable.=C2=A0 He would have to admit he has simply wasted 20 years (or=
 whatever) of his life on=20
> something that was Plain Wrong.
>=20
> PO's response to these posts is to ignore them=C2=A0

He cannot understand what people says. Because he cannot even understand ev=
ery
fundamental term or concept of science/math/logic/computation, instead he H=
AS his=C2=A0
own interpretation AND believes he understands better than anyone else. He =
believes
"Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else=
 can see."
Therefore, lots of misinterpretation follows, worst of all, lies (purposefu=
lly=20
twists what has happened, what he reads,..,etc. even what he wrote/said bef=
ore).
Olcott has problem to see that his C skill is worse than beginners, and thi=
nks=20
he is an C expert !!! (competent at least).

> - it's like he's been shell shocked, and like a=20
> childhood trauma he suppresses the memory of the event.=C2=A0 After a cou=
ple of weeks he just starts=20
> repeating the claim that he has proved the traces differ and that it is a=
 "verified fact" etc., as=20
> though nothing has happened.=C2=A0 (Of course the truth is the exact oppo=
site - the verified fact is that
> the traces are identical up to the point where HHH decides to stop the si=
mulation.)
>=20

As said, it does not matter whether the 'simulation' is correct or not, POO=
H is invalid
for the Halting Problem. (try a valid one to know).

> Mike.
>=20