Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.theory
Subject: Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 17:50:59 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 74
Message-ID: <v23e8l$14rq1$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v20027$865j$1@dont-email.me>
 <v200oo$843p$1@dont-email.me> <v200u2$8dd9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v202k0$8q16$1@dont-email.me> <v20654$9o07$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2086v$a4tr$1@dont-email.me> <v208db$a6jn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v20ak6$an12$1@dont-email.me> <v20b6v$akk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v22e19$2u32$1@news.muc.de> <v22g3h$tjgs$3@dont-email.me>
 <v22ib3$2f2m$1@news.muc.de> <v22phh$1006v$2@dont-email.me>
 <v22tfp$vhj$1@news.muc.de> <v22v5g$11dig$1@dont-email.me>
 <v232em$r0s$1@news.muc.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 00:51:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4dc0119aaf775edb7bf006f6d2fcc2e1";
	logging-data="1208129"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18JlPlFN9xDnGawRfoCrmva"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:s1podSfT1Srs3pRnZ9f2ZB8yIVM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v232em$r0s$1@news.muc.de>
Bytes: 3843

On 5/15/2024 2:29 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> [ Followup-To: set ]
> 

Message-ID: <v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>

http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cv0ummt%242qov3%242%40i2pn2.org%3E

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;
 > }
 >
 > 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.

> For a start, it's nothing like what Richard said. 

Now that I cut out all of the weird formatting so we
can see what Richard actually said immediately below
what I said:

 > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
 >> Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly stop running
 >> unless aborted by H

On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > ...THAT H can not possible simulate
 > the input to the end before it aborts it ...

We can see that Richard misconstrued what I said.
That he construed: "Every D simulated by H"
to mean: {D never simulated by H} (his code example)

We can see that this seems to be too big of an error
to be an honest mistake.

If you want to disagree and say that it seems like an
honest mistake to you, that is OK.

If you try to get away with saying Richard made no mistake
everyone will know that you are lying.

I spent many hundreds out hours carefully formulating
those words that Richard intentionally twisted.

*On Thursday 10/13/2022 11:29 AM*
MIT Professor Michael Sipser agreed that these verbatim words are correct
(He has neither reviewed nor agreed to anything else in this paper)

"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 can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D specifies a 
non-halting sequence of configurations."


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer