Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 02:13:12 +0000
Subject: Re: No decider is accountable for the computation that itself is
 contained within
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <v80irs$2tlb5$1@dont-email.me> <v828ju$3a1gf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v82vpu$3dftr$6@dont-email.me> <v8506m$3s27b$1@dont-email.me>
 <v88g60$i7kl$5@dont-email.me>
 <8ac9fd02d6247cec58098de53c964a5feed41946@i2pn2.org>
 <v88u9c$kpv7$1@dont-email.me>
 <3c24d92260cc29c0b39004bf3448d415c567549a@i2pn2.org>
 <v8b443$13n24$1@dont-email.me>
 <00e25e8f7bb0af364c2bad26b5a1ebeb76fee34d@i2pn2.org>
 <v8bhhe$15une$3@dont-email.me>
 <f8c0c2ac41bd97a5cdbf0d3a50274a08e6246c72@i2pn2.org>
 <v8blja$16ibk$3@dont-email.me>
From: Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 03:13:12 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.17
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <v8blja$16ibk$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <CLGcnZQGLvckADT7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 65
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-d7xyKZ8vK7SmkfI1NSHZ2xxnIduDAMHRbWU6K5GBCJxhTV7yvSmaVZQ4epeYuLTKszI/cV9OXKJy/jF!EzDjcavYK/uVbiqxVrDcrNcNPPoomWW6AbtkwhICH4OjGrHaV3RzLmOmrzwmuwe8BWs6t5NXaAs1!0X0FKSPX7Z28YJThJy1jgAcNIzE=
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4454

On 30/07/2024 22:22, olcott wrote:
> On 7/30/2024 4:09 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Tue, 30 Jul 2024 15:13:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 7/30/2024 2:52 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:24:35 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 7/30/2024 2:24 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Mon, 29 Jul 2024 15:32:44 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> On 7/29/2024 3:17 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 29 Jul 2024 11:32:00 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 7/28/2024 3:40 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-27 14:21:50 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/27/2024 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-26 16:28:43 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Halt deciders are not allowed to report on the behavior of the
>>>>>>>>> actual computation that they themselves are contained within. They
>>>>>>>>> are only allowed to compute the mapping from input finite strings.
>>>>>>>> What if the input is the same as the containing computation?
>>>>>>> It always is except in the case where the decider is reporting on
>>>>>>> the TM description that itself is contained within.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't understand. "The input is not the same as the containing
>>>>>> computation when deciding on the description of the containing
>>>>>> computation"?
>>>> I mean: is that an accurate paraphrase?
>>>>
>>>>> An executing Turing machine is not allowed to report on its own
>>>>> behavior. Every decider is only allowed to report on the behavior that
>>>>> its finite string input specifies.
>>>> And what happens when those are the same?
> 
>>> That is always the case except in the rare exception that I discovered
>>> where a simulating halt decider is simulating the input that calls
>>> itself.
> 
>> Always? Most TMs don't get themselves as input. OTOH that is one of
>> the most interesting cases.
>> The description of a TM specifies the behaviour of that machine
>> when it is running.
>>
> 
> The x86 code of DDD when correctly emulated by HHH according
> to the semantics of the x86 code of DDD and HHH does have
> different behavior that the directly executed DDD as a matter
> of verified fact for three years.
> 
> People deny this as if a smash a Boston Cream pie in the face
> and they deny that there ever was any pie even while their
> voice is incoherent because they are talking through the pie
> smashed on their face.

Hehe, when you go on like this I can't help thinking of "head crusher":

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8t4pmlHRokg>

Mike.


> 
> *I do not a more precise way to say this now*
> DDD is emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the
> x86 code of DDD and HHH. This does include a recursive call
> from DDD to HHH(DDD) that cannot possibly stop repeating
> unless HHH aborts its emulation of DDD.
>