Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally? ---
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 07:04:11 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v0vrvb$2s5vs$2@i2pn2.org>
References: <v0k4jc$laej$1@dont-email.me> <v0l11u$ussl$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0lh24$123q3$1@dont-email.me> <v0lic7$2g492$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v0lkas$12q0o$3@dont-email.me> <v0loq2$2g493$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0lq7d$14579$2@dont-email.me> <v0ls98$2g492$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m29q$166o1$1@dont-email.me> <v0m37e$2gl1e$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m3v5$16k3h$1@dont-email.me> <v0m55t$2gl1f$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v0m5sn$172p4$1@dont-email.me> <v0o87n$1p7s5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0oab4$1pbn5$3@dont-email.me> <v0qh21$2df66$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0r40q$2hb7o$5@dont-email.me> <v0t3aa$33g49$1@dont-email.me>
 <v0todh$3881i$2@dont-email.me> <v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v0v4i7$3l29l$13@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 11:04:11 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3020796"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v0v4i7$3l29l$13@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3606
Lines: 65

On 5/2/24 12:24 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly stop running unless
>>> aborted by H does specify non-terminating behavior to H. When
>>> H aborts this simulation that does not count as D halting.
>>
>> Which is just meaningless gobbledygook by your definitions.
>>
>> It means that
>>
>> int H(ptr m, ptr d) {
>>     return 0;
>> }
>>
> 
> Your H is not simulating D at all thus not
> "Every D simulated by H" quoted above


Yes it is, it is just aborting the simulation before it started.

After all, YOUR H stops simulating at a point based on no valid logic.

Now, if you want to try to define what your simulation actually means, 
and also have a tighter definition of your criteria, you could make a point.

Just make sure your H still meets it.

IF you what a more strict version, then H needs a tiny bit of actual 
code to look at the first state of program D, and if it is a final state 
return 1 else return 0.

So it becomes every program that doesn't start halted never halts.

It is still a toy problem.


> 
> Your H is not simulating D at all thus not
> "Every D simulated by H" quoted above
> 
> Your H is not simulating D at all thus not
> "Every D simulated by H" quoted above
> 
>> is always correct, because THAT H can not possible simulate the input 
>> to the end before it aborts it, and that H is all that that H can be, 
>> or it isn't THAT H. ---
>>
>> Unless you clarify your altered definitions, H is what H is and that 
>> just becomes the conclusion.
>>
>>>
>>>> Then you can compare the definitions and try
>>>> to determine whether "abnormal termination" implies halting or 
>>>> non-halting
>>>> or neither. Note that "halting" is a freature of a Turing machine (a 
>>>> Turing
>>>> machine halts or does not halt) but "abnormal termination" seems to be
>>>> a feature of a particlar simulation (a simulation of a Truing machine
>>>> is or is not abnormally terminated).
>>>>
>>>
>>
>