Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong ---
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 13:58:35 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <v3ifcr$3f571$10@dont-email.me>
References: <v3501h$lpnh$1@dont-email.me> <v3bfbm$2im01$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v3bg39$22o6m$1@dont-email.me> <v3cbhu$2k3ld$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v3clo2$28p7n$1@dont-email.me> <v3dft1$2lfup$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v3dhob$2dio8$1@dont-email.me> <v3dk0d$2lfup$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v3dkf2$2e2po$1@dont-email.me> <v3dmnc$2lfup$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v3do66$2ejq2$1@dont-email.me>
 <MPG.40c4fbcb474992459896fd@reader.eternal-september.org>
 <v3f9ha$2qh0t$1@dont-email.me> <v3ffpc$2n53n$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v3fgfb$2riae$2@dont-email.me> <v3fh1a$2n53o$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v3fhkr$2rsbs$2@dont-email.me> <v3fig4$2n53n$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v3fj8h$2rsbs$6@dont-email.me> <v3g0bg$2n53n$18@i2pn2.org>
 <v3g0n2$2v3lp$2@dont-email.me> <v3g329$2n53n$21@i2pn2.org>
 <v3g3np$2vk55$1@dont-email.me> <v3g7e9$2n53n$22@i2pn2.org>
 <v3g7r8$30c96$1@dont-email.me> <v3heeh$2psm0$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v3i1iv$3cpu7$8@dont-email.me> <v3ibmq$2r2f2$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v3icf8$3f830$1@dont-email.me> <v3ie2q$3f51j$6@dont-email.me>
 <v3ieeu$3f571$6@dont-email.me> <v3if43$3f51j$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2024 20:58:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3e1a2626012d6c432c11247ed1bf0353";
	logging-data="3642593"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+4cK4rE/IO56EfUsFhczJg"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Al5uJQyAgjNx7ggwmLdS3ulpI/s=
In-Reply-To: <v3if43$3f51j$10@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5991

On 6/2/2024 1:53 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 02.jun.2024 om 20:42 schreef olcott:
>> On 6/2/2024 1:36 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 02.jun.2024 om 20:08 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 6/2/2024 12:55 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Sun, 02 Jun 2024 10:02:54 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 6/2/2024 4:36 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Sat, 01 Jun 2024 17:37:28 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 5:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 5:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 4:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 4:35 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 3:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 11:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 12:18 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 11:08 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 11:58 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/2024 10:46 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/1/24 10:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Every DD correctly simulated by any HH of the infinite set of 
>>>>>>>>>> HH/DD
>>>>>>>>>> pairs that match the above template never reaches past its own
>>>>>>>>>> simulated line 03 in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation of DD 
>>>>>>>>>> by HH.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But since the simulation was aborted,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *The above never mentions anything about any simulation being 
>>>>>>>> aborted*
>>>>>>> Not simulating an infinite number of steps of infinite recursion is
>>>>>>> incorrect. You always forget this requirement: the simulation 
>>>>>>> must be
>>>>>>> complete.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When HH correctly simulates N steps of DD it is incorrect to say that
>>>>>> these N steps were incorrectly simulated.
>>>>> The simulation is incorrect if it stops at that point and the 
>>>>> simulated
>>>>> machine is not in a final state, even if it was correct up to that 
>>>>> point.
>>>>> It also matters what steps where simulated, not only if each was 
>>>>> correct.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Introduction to the Theory of Computation, by Michael Sipser
>>>> https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael-Sipser/dp/113318779X/
>>>>
>>>> On 10/13/2022 11:29:23 AM
>>>> MIT Professor Michael Sipser agreed that this verbatim paragraph is 
>>>> correct
>>>> (He has neither reviewed nor agreed to anything else in this paper)
>>>>
>>>> <Professor Sipser agreed>
>>>> 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.
>>>> </Professor Sipser agreed>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> What are the sets of HH and DD? I thought they were concrete 
>>>>>>> machines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The infinite set of every HH/DD pair where HH correctly simulates 
>>>>>> 1 or
>>>>>> more steps of DD is the infinite set that I am referring to.
>>>>> I see only a single DD. All H that stop simulating D before it 
>>>>> reaches a
>>>>> final state are already wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are an infinite number of different HH/DD pairs specified by that
>>>> template. One class of them simulates N steps and one class of them
>>>> simulates ∞ steps. Some of them play a game of bingo before simulating
>>>> any steps. Some of them play a game of chess after simulating N steps.
>>>>
>>>> *IN NONE OF THESE CASES DOES DD CORRECTLY SIMULATED BY HH HALT*
>>>>
>>>
>>> Similarly:
>>>
>>> *IN NONE OF THESE CASES DOES HH CORRECTLY SIMULATED BY HH HALT*
>>>
>>
>> *That is NEVER WAS any requirement*
>>
> 
> It was a requirement that HH would halt.

It was never any requirement that any simulated input halt.

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