Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis ---Breakthrough ?
Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2024 19:19:29 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <54011d725c5cf299c300fbf729915cce1aa2c6b0@i2pn2.org>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vghb16$2ge1v$1@dont-email.me>
 <e51f21daadd358ef13801c918106c2fdc65a9f6b@i2pn2.org>
 <vghe3p$2gr3p$1@dont-email.me>
 <4cb98b3918d6745f53bb19582b59e786d4af5022@i2pn2.org>
 <vghgar$2h30o$1@dont-email.me>
 <e40629600e317dba47dd3d066d83899fa7b8a7ab@i2pn2.org>
 <vgiq1d$2nkqv$1@dont-email.me>
 <c7372fcf786ecb5e394cf44079e5ff126899e252@i2pn2.org>
 <vgk26b$31qrg$2@dont-email.me>
 <17a781f4479f0c8fb2c02d40a55e5cfa7a0f4847@i2pn2.org>
 <vgl967$37h38$7@dont-email.me>
 <78a3858469721b9c70c6672df4bf2c03e0492d70@i2pn2.org>
 <vgmdge$3ecms$1@dont-email.me>
 <f157303ea6a750b5c42878bb6464ddca0821526d@i2pn2.org>
 <vgme3d$3egga$1@dont-email.me>
 <0378d69cb2932277db2ddeaa53635eb4ceb29e3d@i2pn2.org>
 <vgnthh$3qq7s$5@dont-email.me>
 <812056ef4c835c43225a6331d8f2de9dbb7325d5@i2pn2.org>
 <vgo57b$3sfle$3@dont-email.me>
 <8d45eda8bedb636afb0bd68da3c044d40aca7bdd@i2pn2.org>
 <vgof3i$3ucjr$2@dont-email.me>
 <fd79d5cada75cbd6494d8cdd939e8e3c530072b8@i2pn2.org>
 <vgos3b$12qt$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 00:19:29 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1745154"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vgos3b$12qt$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3606
Lines: 48

On 11/9/24 6:43 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 11/9/2024 2:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 11/9/24 3:01 PM, olcott wrote:
> 
> On 11/3/2024 12:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>  > On 11/3/24 9:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>  >>
>  >> The finite string input to HHH specifies that HHH
>  >> MUST EMULATE ITSELF emulating DDD.
>  >
>  > Right, and it must CORRECTLY determine what an unbounded
>  > emulation of that input would do, even if its own programming
>  > only lets it emulate a part of that.
>  >
> 
>>>>
>>>> I am saying that HHH does need to do the infinite emulation itself, but 
>>>
>>> Right and it doesn't.
>>
>> But doesn't give the required answer, which is based on something 
>> doing it.
>>
> 
> The unaborted emulation of DDD by HHH DOES NOT HALT.
> *Maybe I have to dumb it down some more*

But that isn't the HHH that you are talking about.

It seems, you don't understand that in a given evaluation, HHH and DDD 
are FIXED PROGRAM.

> 
> HHH predicts what would happen if no HHH ever aborted
> its emulation of DDD. This specific DDD never halts
> even if it stops running due to out-of-memory error.
> 

In other words, it tries to predict what some OTHER version of the 
program DDD would do if it was based on some OTHER version of HHH, 
instead of the job it is supposed to do of predicting what THIS version 
of DDD does which is built on THIS version of HHH.

Since its input is THIS DDD, that is what it must answer about, not some 
other non-input.

Or, in simpler terms, you just the f- don't understand what a PROGRAM is.

Sorry, you are just proving you are an idiot.