Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Sufficient knowledge of C proves that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:02:17 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <68b207adc57d1312ccd2f941bbb47bb70b2c37e8@i2pn2.org>
References: <vnumf8$24cq0$1@dont-email.me> <vo8jr6$7fbd$2@dont-email.me>
	<vo9gth$fuct$2@dont-email.me> <vo9o3h$gu6t$2@dont-email.me>
	<voah0r$m3dj$6@dont-email.me> <voambu$ng5r$2@dont-email.me>
	<voamvc$nv62$1@dont-email.me> <voatki$p4au$2@dont-email.me>
	<voau7d$p4sc$2@dont-email.me> <voavuf$p4au$4@dont-email.me>
	<vob15v$ptj9$1@dont-email.me>
	<e3693316b91f4bd357aa26a12ebd469086c11c65@i2pn2.org>
	<vocpt8$16c4e$5@dont-email.me>
	<7ad847dee2cf3bc54cddc66a1e521f8a7242c01f@i2pn2.org>
	<vod3ft$18eoa$1@dont-email.me>
	<50488790b3d697cccde5689919b1d1d001b01965@i2pn2.org>
	<vodrkt$1d1gu$1@dont-email.me>
	<cdaa950d75c0b258288974055228e93f38067535@i2pn2.org>
	<voft9v$1rkco$1@dont-email.me>
	<e351c3a68fe9fffc21c6b82a50743305af794dd0@i2pn2.org>
	<vojrqp$2oikq$3@dont-email.me>
	<ffb46665a51356faf0fa3b56db966a31812e8134@i2pn2.org>
	<vokon8$2t882$1@dont-email.me> <vol0mf$2ulu5$1@dont-email.me>
	<vom1q4$34osr$3@dont-email.me> <von3q8$3d901$1@dont-email.me>
	<vone2v$3ffar$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 13:02:17 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1906"; 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: 5947
Lines: 79

Am Fri, 14 Feb 2025 06:48:31 -0600 schrieb olcott:
> On 2/14/2025 3:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 14.feb.2025 om 01:12 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/13/2025 8:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> Op 13.feb.2025 om 13:31 schreef olcott:
>>>>> On 2/13/2025 3:16 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Wed, 12 Feb 2025 22:18:32 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 2:05 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:19:11 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/11/2025 9:23 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 15:38:37 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 2:48 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:46:21 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 6:52 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:02:48 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/10/2025 5:16 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:54:39 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 1:33 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 20:04 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 12:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 18:00 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 10:50 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:18 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/9/2025 2:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:10 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:54 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:47 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/8/2025 3:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 08.feb.2025 om 06:53 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 7:27 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/25 8:12 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/2025 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/7/25 11:26 AM, olcott wrote:


>>>>>>> Since there is a 5% chance that the treatment I will have next
>>>>>>> month will kill me and this treatment is my only good chance I
>>>>>>> will totally ignore anything that diverges from the point.
>>>>>> Ok, I will wait a month then.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone that knows the C language sufficiently well knows that DD
>>>>> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, which shows the limitation of HHH which makes that it cannot
>>>> properly decide about its input, because  it must abort the correct
>>>> simulation before it sees that the correct simulation terminates
>>>> normally.
>>>>
>>> The correct simulation is only the one that it sees by definition. it
>>> maps ITS INPUT TO THE BEHAVIOR OF THIS INPUT.
>> 
>> If I close my eyes, so that I do not see the accident, I cannot claim
>> that the accident did not happen. That is the reasoning of a 2 years
>> old child.
>> Similarly, when HHH aborts the simulation, it closes its eyes for what
>> happens in a correct simulation of DD.
> HHH(DD) maps the finite string input of DD to the behavior that it
> specifies.
DD specifies halting behaviour, by only calling a „decider”, a program
purported to halt.

> This behavior does include DD repeatedly calling HHH(DD) in
> recursive simulation that that cannot possibly terminate normally.
If DD doesn’t halt, the outerHHH can’t be able to report on it;
if the outer HHH halted, the inner one would do the same, because
it IS the same.

>>> All of the people that think it should map the behavior of a non-input
>>> have always been wrong.
>> It is a verified fact that the finite string given to HHH describes a
>> program that halts.
>> But olcott claims he does not use this input, but a non-input, a
>> different program, as input to HHH. He does not understand that HHH
>> should decide about the input described by the finite string that has
>> been proven to halt.
QFT

-- 
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.