Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,alt.usenet.kooks
Subject: Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:12:21 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v4e9l5$3rbs4$2@i2pn2.org>
References: <v45tec$4q15$1@dont-email.me> <v46na7$3ifov$4@i2pn2.org>
	<v48be9$rgsh$1@dont-email.me> <v48gh6$3kcoe$4@i2pn2.org>
	<v48jv2$se9c$1@dont-email.me> <v49dge$3kcoe$5@i2pn2.org>
	<v4a0hs$157ic$3@dont-email.me> <v4ak5o$3kcoe$6@i2pn2.org>
	<v4am8r$19edk$1@dont-email.me> <v4b17k$3nf9n$2@i2pn2.org>
	<v4b48k$1f89t$4@dont-email.me> <v4c12t$3oop0$4@i2pn2.org>
	<v4ck2c$1o4b4$2@dont-email.me> <v4d9gt$3qbnc$2@i2pn2.org>
	<v4daoq$1sioe$2@dont-email.me> <v4dbun$3qbnc$4@i2pn2.org>
	<v4df07$1te0b$1@dont-email.me> <v4dfsu$3qbnd$2@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dhuk$1tsdf$3@dont-email.me> <v4diet$3qbnc$7@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dj9i$1tsdf$5@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:12:21 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4042628"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3894
Lines: 51

Am Wed, 12 Jun 2024 20:50:42 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 6/12/2024 8:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/12/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/12/2024 7:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/12/24 8:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/12/2024 6:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/12/24 7:25 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 6:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/12/24 12:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 6:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

>>>>>>>> Why, because the claim isn't about the simulate by H, but the
>>>>>>>> behavior of the difectly executed D(D), or its simulation by a
>>>>>>>> UTM.
>>>>>>> H(D,D) must compute the mapping from its finite string input
>>>>>>> transforming the finite string of its input into the behavior that
>>>>>>> it specifies using finite string transformation rules.
And give the right answer: does D(D) halt?
>>>>>> Yes, it only CAN do what it can compute, but what it MUST do is
>>>>>> answer the question posed to it, which might be impossible. And
>>>>>> that Question is about the behavior of the direct execution of the
>>>>>> machine represented by its input.
>>>>> *H is not even being asked that question*
Oh yes, it is. We want to know if D(D) halts.
>>>> So, H isn't a Halt Decider?
>>>> Because the question being asked of *ALL* halt deciders, is "Does the
>>>> machine/input described by its input halt when it is run?"
>>> THAT IS THE QUESTION THAT IS ASSUMED.
>>> THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION THAT IS BEING ASKED.
H answers the wrong question.
>> How do you say that?
>> Do you not understand the meaning of the words "Halt Decider"?

>>> H must derive the question that it is being asked by computing the
>>> mapping from its finite string input to the behavior specified by this
>>> finite string input.
>> So, Definitions don't mean anything?
> Halt deciders are not being asked English questions nitwit.
Nitwit. It can't derive the answer.

>>> When it does this it does not end up with the behavior of the directly
>>> executed D(D).
>> Which just means it fails to do what it must to be a Halt decider.
> H must compute question that it is being asked.
Which is "does D(D) halt?", not "can I simulate this?".

> The question that H computes IS NOT THE BEHAVIOR OF D(D). IT DOES NOT
> MATTER HOW MUCH IT IS SUPPOSED TO DO THAT.
Then H is not the halt decider you are looking for.

-- 
joes