Path: ...!news.misty.com!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: Every D correctly simulated by H never reaches its final state
 and halts
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 21:46:04 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v2jios$1no6v$2@i2pn2.org>
References: <v26b2t$1rdu0$1@dont-email.me> <v270q1$22vhs$1@dont-email.me>
 <v276pg$2459k$1@dont-email.me> <v27ukn$28r3c$2@dont-email.me>
 <v29tb3$2nna0$1@dont-email.me> <v2aehu$2qsgt$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2ckon$3bc16$1@dont-email.me> <v2crno$3cifp$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2cvlk$3de7m$1@dont-email.me> <v2d0jd$3ddo5$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2f0dk$3ssf8$1@dont-email.me> <v2g2nn$3ugq$2@dont-email.me>
 <v2hq57$hge2$1@dont-email.me> <v2i89v$jvcs$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 01:46:04 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1827039"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v2i89v$jvcs$3@dont-email.me>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2704
Lines: 37

On 5/21/24 9:41 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/21/2024 4:39 AM, Mikko wrote:

>> Apparently your interpretation of either "that reasoning" or
>> "everyone" is different from mine.
>>
> 
> Richard said that he didn't know he was supposed to provide
> correct answers, he thought it was OK to intentionally provide
> incorrect answers (AKA lie)

That isn't what I said, and so you are shown to be a LIAR.

I said that my H was just as accurate, as yours.

That means, you ADMIT that you have lied, that your machine was correct, 
and know it.

After all, YOU argure that H is allowed to say that D(D) doesn't halt, 
just because its simulaiton doesn't reach the end, even though you know 
and admit that D(D) WILL HALT.

Thus, since the criteria allows the not reaching a final state to be 
because the simulator didn't simulate long enough, my alternate machine 
was JUST AS CORRECT.

> 
> On 5/19/2024 12:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>  > On 5/19/24 9:59 AM, olcott wrote:
>  >> Richard has stated that he thinks that an example of
>  >> {D never simulated by H} ∈ {every D simulated by H}
>  >
>  > No, the H that didn't simulate its input shows that
>  > *once you allow H to not be required to be correct*,
>  > that we can then have a trivial function that is
>  > "just as correct" (since wrong answers were allowed).
>