Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<e916bd7901968e2927324d9b75bee493714d6fed@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1 Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 07:01:52 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <e916bd7901968e2927324d9b75bee493714d6fed@i2pn2.org> References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vs1vuv$2ot1m$1@dont-email.me> <d2f86fad6c5823e3c098f30d331576c52263b398@i2pn2.org> <vs2fgn$354gv$5@dont-email.me> <vs2u3v$3mcjm$2@dont-email.me> <vs434l$mmcb$3@dont-email.me> <vs45a3$resr$1@dont-email.me> <vs4ne1$1c1ja$1@dont-email.me> <vs4ovc$1e09p$1@dont-email.me> <vs4pg8$1c1ja$6@dont-email.me> <vs4pi9$1e09p$2@dont-email.me> <vs4qpp$1c1ja$7@dont-email.me> <vs4r2u$1e09p$3@dont-email.me> <vs4snt$1c1ja$9@dont-email.me> <e11c6f4f29bb0c77dbd10f8e20bca766712977d0@i2pn2.org> <vs50kt$1c1ja$15@dont-email.me> <vs5r0j$2f37e$1@dont-email.me> <vs6srk$39556$12@dont-email.me> <vs6t10$2p360$6@dont-email.me> <vs70tc$39556$21@dont-email.me> <vs71bq$2p360$10@dont-email.me> <vs76m9$3m3q0$1@dont-email.me> <vs77th$2p360$11@dont-email.me> <vs78cu$3ms9k$1@dont-email.me> <c2b91231b9052e07b6705250938fb9095e711327@i2pn2.org> <vs7kvf$3eal$2@dont-email.me> <aeb75b411e9f77c974585181c671a47d03b22078@i2pn2.org> <vs7qdm$8dae$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 11:02:41 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2243287"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 In-Reply-To: <vs7qdm$8dae$2@dont-email.me> Bytes: 10731 Lines: 202 On 3/28/25 11:45 PM, olcott wrote: > On 3/28/2025 9:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/28/25 10:13 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/28/2025 8:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 3/28/25 6:38 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 3/28/2025 5:30 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>> On 3/28/2025 6:09 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 3:38 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 4:30 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 2:24 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 3:21 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 4:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Op 28.mrt.2025 om 03:13 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/25 9:07 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:38 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:12 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:11 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:02 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:27 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:50 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 2:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 27.mrt.2025 om 04:09 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/26/2025 8:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d pop ebp >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3 ret >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non-Halting is that the machine won't reach >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its final staste even if an unbounded number >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of steps are emulated. Since HHH doesn't do >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that, it isn't showing non-halting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH will never reach its >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final state >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in an unbounded number of steps. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH1 reaches its final state in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of steps. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not very interesting to know whether a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulator reports that it is unable to reach the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end of the simulation of a program that halts in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> direct execution. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That IS NOT what HHH is reporting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH correctly rejects DDD because DDD correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final halt state. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, HHH is not a halt decider because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is not computing the required mapping: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Troll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:19:42 PM UTC-5, olcott >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > In other words you could find any error in my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> post so you resort to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > lame tactic of ad hominem personal attack. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Troll >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/22/2024 10:51 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > *Ad Hominem attacks are the first resort of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clueless wonders* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I corrected your error dozens of times and you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore these corrections and mindlessly repeat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your error like a bot >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which is what you've been doing for the last three years. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Projection, as always. I'll add the above to the list. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TM's cannot possibly ever report on the behavior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the direct execution of another TM. I proved >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this many times in may ways. Ignoring these proofs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IT NOT ANY FORM OF REBUTTAL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure they can. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WHere is your proof? And what actual accepted principles >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is is based on? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No TM can take another directly executed TM as an input >>>>>>>>>>>>> and Turing computable functions only compute the mapping >>>>>>>>>>>>> from inputs to outputs. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> If A TM can only compute the mapping from *its* input to >>>>>>>>>>>> *its* output, it cannot be wrong. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Taking a wild guess does not count as computing the mapping. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> False. The only requirement is to map a member of the input >>>>>>>>>> domain to a member of the output domain as per the requirements. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If it does so in all cases, the mapping is computed. It >>>>>>>>>> doesn't matter how it's done. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unless an input is transformed into an output >>>>>>>>> on the basis of a syntactic or semantic property >>>>>>>>> of this input it is not a Turing computable function. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> int StringLength(char *S) >>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>> return 5; >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does not compute the string length of any string. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> False. It computes the length of all strings of length 5. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It does not compute (a sequence of steps of an >>>>>>> algorithm that derive an output on the basis of >>>>>>> an input) jack shit it makes a guess. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Doesn't matter. If the requirement is to return 5 for strings that >>>>>> have a length of 5, it meets the requirement. >>>>> >>>>> The actual requirement is to compute the mapping >>>>> from a finite string to its length using a sequence >>>>> of algorithmic steps. >>>>> >>>>> Likewise for halting. Compute the mapping from a >>>>> finite string of machine code to the behavior that >>>>> this finite string specifies. >>>>> >>>> >>>> With that specifcation DEFINED as the behavior of the machine >>>> described when it is actually run. >>>> >>> >>> In other words the halting problem is defined to >>> not be allowed to use computable functions and it >>> is this screwball definition that prevents the ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========