Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --self-evident truth--
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2024 21:26:38 -0700
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <ut5rdu$23hsc$22@i2pn2.org>
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> <ut2675$1vtvj$9@i2pn2.org>
 <ut26mi$2e06s$5@dont-email.me> <ut27l8$1vtvj$17@i2pn2.org>
 <ut283n$2e06s$9@dont-email.me> <ut2ava$1vtvi$14@i2pn2.org>
 <ut2dml$2ffu8$3@dont-email.me> <ut2h1a$1vtvj$24@i2pn2.org>
 <ut2iqa$2gkoj$1@dont-email.me> <ut2ler$1vtvj$28@i2pn2.org>
 <ut32q0$2n0uu$2@dont-email.me> <ut33k7$218kg$2@i2pn2.org>
 <ut34k2$2n0uu$6@dont-email.me> <ut377b$218kh$3@i2pn2.org>
 <ut4dt4$2v4ce$1@dont-email.me> <ut5d34$23hsb$8@i2pn2.org>
 <ut5env$35hhq$2@dont-email.me> <ut5kdc$36l75$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut5ksp$36j8b$1@dont-email.me> <ut5nfo$3as0r$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut5p4d$3b387$1@dont-email.me> <ut5pq9$3b7ih$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut5qhn$3bau4$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:26:38 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2213772"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <ut5qhn$3bau4$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4908
Lines: 82

On 3/16/24 9:11 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/16/2024 10:59 PM, immibis wrote:
>> On 17/03/24 04:47, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/16/2024 10:19 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>> On 17/03/24 03:35, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/16/2024 9:26 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>> On 17/03/24 01:50, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 7:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 8:29 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/2024 11:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/15/24 8:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> H(D,D) fails to make the required mistake of reporting on 
>>>>>>>>>>> what it does not see.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But it DOES make a mistake, because it does answer the 
>>>>>>>>>> question correctly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are just PROVING you think lying is ok.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You TOTALLY don't understand the meaning of truth.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are REALLY just a Pathological Liar, as you have no 
>>>>>>>>>> concept of real truth,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The original halt status criteria has the impossible requirement
>>>>>>>>> that H(D,D) must report on behavior that it does not actually see.
>>>>>>>>> Requiring H to be clairvoyant is an unreasonable requirement.
>>>>>>>>> *The criteria shown below eliminate the requirement of 
>>>>>>>>> clairvoyance*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (a) If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input 
>>>>>>>>> D until
>>>>>>>>> H correctly determines that its simulated D would never stop 
>>>>>>>>> running
>>>>>>>>> unless aborted then
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *H correctly simulates its input D until*
>>>>>>>>> Means H does a correct partial simulation of D until H correctly
>>>>>>>>> matches the recursive simulation non-halting behavior pattern.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But turning out to be impposible, doesn't make it incorrect or 
>>>>>>>> invalid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *You seems to be ridiculously disingenuous about the self-evident 
>>>>>>> truth*
>>>>>>> For every possible way that H can be encoded and D(D) calls 
>>>>>>> H(D,D) either H(D,D) aborts its simulation or D(D) never stops 
>>>>>>> running.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For every possible way that H can be encoded, H(D,D) aborts its 
>>>>>> simulation. 
>>>>>
>>>>> That does not correspond to the specification of H shown immediately
>>>>> above that only has H(D,D) simulate its input and does not even 
>>>>> require
>>>>> H to ever stop running.
>>>>
>>>> It corresponds to the actual H that you wrote.
>>>
>>> For every possible way that H can be encoded and D(D) calls H(D,D)
>>> either H(D,D) aborts its simulation or D(D) never stops running.
>>
>> For every possible way that H can be encoded, it aborts its 
>> simulation. If it doesn't abort, then it's a different piece of code, 
>> not H.
> 
> H is an algorithm that simulates its input and correctly
> determines whether or not it needs to abort this simulation.
> That is all that this thread's H does.
> 

And what defines "Need"?

Note, if H is an algorithm, we can't talk of "changing" it, or it looses 
its identity.

NOTE, You didn't answer the question, so I will presume you can't deny 
the implication.