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