Path: ...!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: Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --Categorically
 Exhaustive Reasoning--
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 04:57:56 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <ut35c4$2nidu$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ut1sgk$2buev$2@dont-email.me> <ut20uf$1vtvi$1@i2pn2.org>
 <ut21t3$2d19j$1@dont-email.me> <ut24j0$2dnbk$2@dont-email.me>
 <ut24kj$2djbv$5@dont-email.me> <ut24vk$2dnvv$1@dont-email.me>
 <kQGdnWqR-4ZXRmn4nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <ut2qb5$2i02l$1@dont-email.me> <Zu6JN.446810$Ama9.86698@fx12.iad>
 <ut2vi0$2isof$1@dont-email.me> <ut330a$2n598$5@dont-email.me>
 <ut33mf$2n0uu$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 03:57:56 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5e0b6c3f860d26df69fe64d1961cd1df";
	logging-data="2869694"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/GLvryWZS3C/VuA1RmhXZC"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wMVwzn8YHODhkWy4gnL8ACUtIuM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <ut33mf$2n0uu$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2673

On 16/03/24 04:29, olcott wrote:
> On 3/15/2024 10:17 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 16/03/24 03:18, olcott wrote:
>>> It means that every H(D,D) that correctly determines by a partial
>>> simulation of its input: "H correctly simulates its input D until"
>>> that "D would never stop running unless aborted" that this H(D,D)
>>> <is> necessarily correct.
>>
>> And what does that mean?
>>>
>>>> saying non-halting as it now is looking at a TOTALLY new set of input.
>>>>
>>>> You don't seem very "Exhaustive" in your reasoning.
>>>>
>>>
>>> // The categorically exhaustive part
>>> For every H(D,D) of the infinite set of encodings of H
>>> that simulate their input
>>
>> And what does that mean?
>>
> I am trying to make my words as clear as possible so reviews
> like this one are very helpful.
> 
> There cannot possibly exist any H(D,D) that is called by
> D where H(D,D) simulates its input and D(D) stops running
> and H never aborts its simulation.

And what does THAT mean? What is "any H(D,D)"?

I think you are probably using words in a different way than everyone 
else so it would be nice to understand your words as well as I 
understand Turing machines.

> 
>>  >
>>  > *no D(D) ever stops running unless aborted by H*
>