Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<utf5b3$2gfnv$2@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
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 Subject: Re: Proof that H(D,D) meets its abort criteria --self-evident truth-- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:10:59 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <utf5b3$2gfnv$2@i2pn2.org> References: <ut1sgk$2buev$2@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$1@dont-email.me> <utacqt$d328$1@dont-email.me> <utau6c$2b09e$10@i2pn2.org> <utb28m$ksn2$1@dont-email.me> <utb40e$2be23$1@i2pn2.org> <utb4pf$lati$1@dont-email.me> <utblkl$ohf9$1@dont-email.me> <utc7up$sds6$2@dont-email.me> <ute8b4$1dckc$1@dont-email.me> <utem9s$1g66g$3@dont-email.me> <utf1c0$2gfnv$1@i2pn2.org> <utf1lp$1iphf$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:10:59 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2637567"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird In-Reply-To: <utf1lp$1iphf$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 26026 Lines: 472 On 3/20/24 12:08 PM, olcott wrote: > On 3/20/2024 11:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/20/24 8:54 AM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/20/2024 3:56 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-03-19 14:37:13 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 3/19/2024 4:24 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-03-19 04:37:02 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 11:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/18/24 8:53 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2024 9:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/24 2:48 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> 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 ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========