Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott2@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --self-evident truth--
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 16:48:12 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 299
Message-ID: <utacqt$d328$1@dont-email.me>
References: <ut1sgk$2buev$2@dont-email.me> <ut5env$35hhq$2@dont-email.me>
 <ut5lbn$23hsb$14@i2pn2.org> <ut5lub$3aia1$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut5pn8$23hsb$17@i2pn2.org> <ut5qld$3bau4$4@dont-email.me>
 <ut5rhp$23hsc$23@i2pn2.org> <ut5sbq$3bm5k$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut5tcl$23hsb$19@i2pn2.org> <ut5tlk$3bq8h$2@dont-email.me>
 <ut5um7$23hsc$25@i2pn2.org> <ut6q6q$3hh79$3@dont-email.me>
 <ut79og$3knkh$6@dont-email.me> <ut7u85$3peut$3@dont-email.me>
 <ut899e$27bqa$4@i2pn2.org> <ut8bji$3vipc$3@dont-email.me>
 <ut8cju$27bqa$8@i2pn2.org> <ut8e9k$8nr$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut8gic$27bqb$9@i2pn2.org> <ut8go9$l2l$2@dont-email.me>
 <ut8ide$27bqb$10@i2pn2.org> <ut8j23$t3b$3@dont-email.me>
 <ut8lhu$27bqa$10@i2pn2.org> <ut9k08$7i77$1@dont-email.me>
 <ut9li5$7pdg$1@dont-email.me> <ut9ufd$9qc8$2@dont-email.me>
 <uta5j7$b8d6$1@dont-email.me> <uta7n9$c11s$1@dont-email.me>
 <uta88f$c3ln$1@dont-email.me> <uta8rr$c91o$1@dont-email.me>
 <utaam1$ckrm$1@dont-email.me> <utab3j$cn6l$2@dont-email.me>
 <utac8g$csl0$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:48:13 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="17ec9398ed80e19bde6326f5400a6c92";
	logging-data="429128"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+xykgwfVvY0ImLoogXodBM"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:C8RnpeOGb/HSpR+KO7mTeMjIKTQ=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <utac8g$csl0$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 16652

On 3/18/2024 4:38 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 22:18 schreef olcott:
>> On 3/18/2024 4:11 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 21:40 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 3/18/2024 3:30 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>> On 18/03/24 21:20, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 2:44 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 18:43 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 10:11 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 18.mrt.2024 om 15:44 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 1:04 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 10:22 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 12:11 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 9:42 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 11:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 9:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 10:32 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 8:14 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 9:35 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/24 4:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:37 PM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/03/24 14:11, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:22 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 10:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/17/2024 12:00 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 9:42 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 11:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 9:13 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 10:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 7:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/2024 9:43 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/16/24 5:50 PM, 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And you are incredably stupid to not see 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this doesn't prove what you need it to.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, if you define H to not abort, the we 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get a non-haltig D(D), but H doesn't 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> answwer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, if you define H to abort, then, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We see that you changed the subject away 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is the set of every implementation of its 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spec:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) H(D,D) Simulate input.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Determine if it needs to stop simulating 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its input to prevent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the simulated D(D) from never halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus not a specific algorithm?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, HOW do you determine NEED?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is not an algorithmic step.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can only verify that in retrospect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you fully understand the spec?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but I think not the way you do.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To me, for H to NEED to abort its simulation, 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that means that when giving the input to a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct simulator, that simulator will not halt.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes that is correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have just proven that H doesn't need abort its 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation and the abort decision is incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The head games of a Troll.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which prove NOTHING, as D varies with H, so no D that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was built with an H that aborts its simulation has 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had its actual halting status tested.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *That merely changes the wording of the same truism*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ∀H ∈ TM ∀D ∈ TMD such that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> H(D,D) simulates its input and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D calls H(D,D) and
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========