Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!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: What it would take... People to address my points with
 reasoning instead of rhetoric
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 02:49:01 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 62
Message-ID: <5bb9f96852193549ca12a0af1b73ba797edf75fa.camel@gmail.com>
References: <vvm948$34h6g$2@dont-email.me> <87v7q5n3sc.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	 <vvtf7n$17c1i$5@dont-email.me> <87plgdmldp.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	 <vvudut$1ife1$1@dont-email.me> <vvuii0$1j0qo$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvuk0d$1j6s0$5@dont-email.me> <vvvbtd$1ov7e$10@dont-email.me>
	 <vvvpia$1tcfq$1@dont-email.me> <vvvqd1$1tgam$1@dont-email.me>
	 <vvvrhl$1so2t$2@dont-email.me> <vvvu75$1rc4t$3@dont-email.me>
	 <vvvuil$1so2t$4@dont-email.me> <10001c3$1v9nn$1@dont-email.me>
	 <10002hg$1vl5n$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 20:49:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e31f29e4266dbfa99e16745ceb93783d";
	logging-data="2067208"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1940X7a69OkK9JL/5UiXKdS"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:o4N2WohcSKsjaFPRRU8YNG/4QTE=
In-Reply-To: <10002hg$1vl5n$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3723

On Tue, 2025-05-13 at 19:20 +0100, Mike Terry wrote:
> On 13/05/2025 19:00, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> > On 13/05/2025 18:12, dbush wrote:
> > > On 5/13/2025 1:06 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> > > > On 13/05/2025 17:21, dbush wrote:
> > > > > On 5/13/2025 12:01 PM, olcott wrote:
> > > >=20
> > > > <snip>
> > > >=20
> > > > > > The actual reasoning why HHH is supposed to report
> > > > > > on the behavior of the direct execution of DD()
> > > > > > instead of the actual behavior that the finite
> > > > > > string of DD specifies:
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Quite simply, it's the behavior of the direct execution that we w=
ant to know about.
> > > >=20
> > > > Why?
> > > >=20
> > > > DDD doesn't do anything interesting.
> > >=20
> > > I wasn't referring to DDD specifically, but in general.
> > >=20
> > > He's claiming *in general* that H(X) is supposed to report on "X simu=
lated by H" instead of the=20
> > > direct execution of X,
> >=20
> > ...where the former is obviously less interesting than the latter. Fair=
 enough.
> >=20
> > <snip>
>=20
> Right!=C2=A0 PO's defintion of PO-halting (based on what "the simulator" =
does) makes halting a property=20
> of both the input being decided /and/ the machine doing the deciding.
>=20
> Real halting is a property of just the input being decided, as is require=
d to be the case with any=20
> "decision problem" such as HP.=C2=A0 His definition is a total non-starte=
r.=C2=A0 That's before we even point=20
> out that an input for HP doesn't even have "its simulator" in general.
>=20
> Mike.

The HP is not asking any human to answer whether D halts or not, but asking=
 a=20
TM to answer by taking D as its argument.

olcott is insisting that he can 'spot' D is non-halting (and no one else ca=
n=20
see), and the HP proof is so refuted.
void D() {
 D();       // or H(D) because of 'simulation'
}

So, the rests stories are talks that how POOH is valid and the HP is refute=
d.
I am a bit surprised people react exactly the same (all kind of fabrication
possible) when confronting my proposal that repeating decimals are irration=
al!!!