Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: immibis <news@immibis.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IFZlcmlmaWVkIGZhY3QgdGhhdCDEpC5IIOKfqMSk4p+pIOKfqMSk?=
 =?UTF-8?B?4p+pIGFuZCBIIOKfqMSk4p+pIOKfqMSk4p+pIGhhdmUgZGlmZmVyZW50IGJlaGF2?=
 =?UTF-8?Q?ior_--RASP_Machines--?=
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 01:46:43 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <uslk9j$385q4$5@dont-email.me>
References: <usia2e$2f2pd$1@dont-email.me> <usijm6$1bt2h$1@i2pn2.org>
 <usikk8$2gnhr$8@dont-email.me> <usiljd$2hc10$3@dont-email.me>
 <usineq$2hnpb$3@dont-email.me> <usiq9n$2ijsm$1@dont-email.me>
 <usir82$2inqh$2@dont-email.me> <usit21$2j3c8$1@dont-email.me>
 <usiufa$2j99n$1@dont-email.me> <usiukh$2jaj3$1@dont-email.me>
 <usiuup$2jdc7$2@dont-email.me> <usj254$2jutc$2@dont-email.me>
 <usj2e3$2jut2$1@dont-email.me> <usj2je$2jutc$3@dont-email.me>
 <usj2rs$2jut2$2@dont-email.me> <usj32s$2k5id$1@dont-email.me>
 <usjd20$2plge$1@dont-email.me> <usjef5$1cf5q$6@i2pn2.org>
 <usjfj8$2q613$1@dont-email.me> <usjgs6$1cf5q$7@i2pn2.org>
 <usjhks$2qhfq$1@dont-email.me> <usjj7v$1cf5q$8@i2pn2.org>
 <uskg1p$30hr1$1@dont-email.me> <KEkHN.386271$vFZa.185803@fx13.iad>
 <uskog1$32h3c$1@dont-email.me> <uskpe3$32l00$1@dont-email.me>
 <uskq04$32h3c$3@dont-email.me> <usksvk$33a1p$5@dont-email.me>
 <uskubp$33lov$3@dont-email.me> <usl0u7$34bnj$1@dont-email.me>
 <usljen$385ff$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:46:44 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e447273e1bf9f0711b0b7fc4d6f15609";
	logging-data="3413828"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18iTgEYnxi1KofKj/pIaQln"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2opi65uXS6b5hZ2ywv3p//mvfJ4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <usljen$385ff$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3875

On 11/03/24 01:32, olcott wrote:
> On 3/10/2024 2:16 PM, immibis wrote:
>>
>> I noticed that you gave up on Olcott machines and now you are back to 
>> your old bullshit ways of pretending that the same machine can produce 
>> two different execution traces on the same input. Why don't you show 
>> us an execution trace where that happens? Both traces must show the 
>> first instruction that is different in both traces and I recommend 
>> showing 20 more instructions after that, but you can abort one after 
>> that time, if it doesn't halt, to prevent the trace getting infinitely 
>> long.
> 
> Turing Machines and Olcott machines cannot properly implement
> H1(D,D) and H(D,D) that know their own machine address.

"Know their own machine address" isn't an objective specification and it 
has nothing to do with the halting problem anyway. Turing machines don't 
have machine addresses and Olcott machines don't have machine addresses 
either.

> My C code proves these two have different behavior:
> (a) H1(D,D) + H1_machine_address
> (b) H(D,D) + H_machine_address

Of course.

> Because they are different computations they are
> not required to have the same behavior.

Of course. One of them even answers the halting problem correctly in 
this case. But that's because this case isn't the Linz counterexample 
for H1. If you built the Linz counterexample for H1, which is D1, you'd 
find that H1 gets it wrong, so H1 doesn't solve the halting problem.

> They cannot be implemented as Turing Machines or Olcott
> Machines. They can be implemented as RASP machines proven
> by the fact that they are implemented as C functions.

They can be implemented as Turing machines. Each one is different from 
the other. They are not the same.