Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Hypothetical possibilities -- I reread this again more carefully
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:33:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <67bdf3bb9630f0287dbc1c409dab3bccc4a1fa64@i2pn2.org>
References: <v7gl30$3j9fi$1@dont-email.me> <v7h1fl$3lcvq$3@dont-email.me>
	<v7h224$3li66$3@dont-email.me>
	<e975eef57ba6d3d4cc790818c05b7165443f7ce4@i2pn2.org>
	<v7h5b2$3m6kq$2@dont-email.me>
	<73e4850d3b48903cf85b2967ba713aced98caf96@i2pn2.org>
	<v7h9on$3muu0$1@dont-email.me>
	<09536cf44fc4c3d14b37641cf8fdc9e8a8c24580@i2pn2.org>
	<v7hept$3o0be$1@dont-email.me>
	<97884acd35091ddd67bda892c7a3dd28e188f760@i2pn2.org>
	<v7hftt$3o7r5$1@dont-email.me>
	<f74209ef7d87b6f7891e4a2b89cc18bfe7233810@i2pn2.org>
	<v7hkb2$3otgn$1@dont-email.me>
	<1c5729ae6d0a7bca84d24eec9f85bf30de70e3d9@i2pn2.org>
	<v7hnu6$3pd9s$1@dont-email.me>
	<f0dda3e0d0e85081d8ce0cdd494f5f1f8f8c89e3@i2pn2.org>
	<v7huen$3u1jc$3@dont-email.me> <v7hvdo$3ua28$1@dont-email.me>
	<d818787a167fc3b04a87c6386c5e3c746cec8738@i2pn2.org>
	<v7j5dv$3o7r$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:33:03 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4058496"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2994
Lines: 27

Am Sun, 21 Jul 2024 09:19:43 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 7/21/2024 4:05 AM, joes wrote:
>> Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 22:31:04 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 7/20/2024 10:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 7/20/2024 8:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/20/24 9:23 PM, olcott wrote:

>>>> DDD *correctly simulated* by pure function HHH cannot possibly reach
>>>> its own return instruction.
>>> Only DDD correctly emulated by HHH maps the finite string of the x86
>>> machine code of DDD to the behavior that it actually specifies.
>> Almost correct. Other simulators may map it too, to the behaviour of
>> the direct execution. HHH doesn't.
> No decider is ever allowed to report on the behavior of the actual
> computation that itself is contained within because all deciders only
> take finite string inputs and thus never take a directly executing
> process as an input.
Of course. A decider may, however, be given the description of its
enclosing program as input.

> A Turing machine can report on the behavior that a finite string
> specifies. It cannot report on the behavior of any executing Turing
> machine including its own executing Turing machine.
See above.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.