Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Simulation vs. Execution in the Halting Problem
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 03:45:41 +0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <610e2a54b66e8576b80bda3a0fe188d025b9798e.camel@gmail.com>
References: <yU0_P.1529838$4AM6.776697@fx17.ams4>
	 <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>
	 <22806dcceb8dbd965792253ecfde0a7f4dc5c793.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102c4g1$20jl4$12@dont-email.me>
	 <b27d3b8f4040ac88721a7b772f675f9e1cbb2c03.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102c5nb$21qj7$2@dont-email.me>
	 <602d915e3a80042ddac7f05fb389837ce3cefc12.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102c7dj$226jq$1@dont-email.me>
	 <0373fc8c6462341f655385edf6d4a0664a35981d.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102ca1c$22pmt$1@dont-email.me>
	 <85f876c4db96fb776dabc80c4208feed6aabc76d.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102cdon$23jal$1@dont-email.me>
	 <2e40a87aeb9e28ce23b5ebf3fcbf23dad6728a9b.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102cg6f$246h5$1@dont-email.me>
	 <822e204898d419545ca400a9088970f0b6a5107f.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102ckje$25dg0$2@dont-email.me>
	 <c5adb4ff9ac0a31da990ff83ab1ef7f242a2f7a7.camel@gmail.com>
	 <102cm0u$25dg0$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 21:45:42 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bf8b8c9575553bac70d62eb9d0221f21";
	logging-data="2279974"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18KYUFwZzS4PcX+loxg/T3Q"
User-Agent: Evolution 3.56.2 (3.56.2-1.fc42)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3vHg7rFxeqlpzhw5IOQ0OD/ER/o=
In-Reply-To: <102cm0u$25dg0$3@dont-email.me>

On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 14:39 -0500, olcott wrote:
> On 6/11/2025 2:31 PM, wij wrote:
> > On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 14:14 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > On 6/11/2025 1:25 PM, wij wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2025-06-11 at 12:59 -0500, olcott wrote:
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Yes all other people (especially Dennis Bush) are saying
> > > > > > > that H(D) is required to report on the behavior of the
> > > > > > > direct execution of D() never noticing that this stupidly
> > > > > > > requires H(D) to report on the behavior of its caller.
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > If the H above means the H that the HP refers to. The H is requ=
ired to
> > > > > > report its argument's behavior (ie. by H(D)). But NOT required =
by simulation.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > It turns out that no one ever noticed that simulating halt
> > > > > deciders nullify the HP counter-example input in that this
> > > > > input cannot possibly reach its contradictory part.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > > The HP does not care what D does (simply to say).
> > > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Everyone says that H(D) must re[port on the behavior of
> > > > > the direct execution of D().
> > > >=20
> > > > That is what the HP asks.
> > > >=20
> > > > > > The HP only requires: H(D)=3D=3D1 iff D() halts
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > >=20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > int main()
> > > > > {
> > > > > =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 D(); // calls H(D)
> > > > > }
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Which requires H(D) to report on the behavior of its
> > > > > caller instead of reporting on the behavior that its
> > > > > input actually specifies.
> > > >=20
> > > > That is no problem. H does not care what D does inside (simply to s=
ay).
> > > > The HP simply asks for a H that "H(D)=3D=3D1 iff D() halts".
> > > >=20
> > >=20
> > > Which requires H to report on something that it cannot possibly see.
> >=20
> > On the contrary, what the HP proves is very useful.
> >=20
>=20
> I am not talking about the halting problem, I have always
> been talking about the conventional halting problem proof.
> THIS PROOF IS WRONG

When talking about proof, we say it is valid or not. By doing so, we have
to unambiguously pose the problem and the derivation to the conclusion.
The HP proof just did that.