Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,alt.crackpot
Subject: Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- finite
 string transformation rules
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 17:34:53 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v4fajt$3smqv$5@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> <v4apjs$19rnv$1@dont-email.me>
	<v4arp0$1a7uo$1@dont-email.me> <v4b1c3$3nf9n$3@i2pn2.org>
	<v4b50m$1f89t$5@dont-email.me> <v4c12r$3oop0$3@i2pn2.org>
	<v4cjl7$1o4b4$1@dont-email.me> <v4d991$3qbnc$1@i2pn2.org>
	<v4da12$1sioe$1@dont-email.me> <v4dbmf$3qbnc$3@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dcd6$1sioe$3@dont-email.me> <v4df0h$3qbnd$1@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dhf5$1tsdf$2@dont-email.me> <v4dja1$3qbnd$5@i2pn2.org>
	<v4djhf$1tsdf$6@dont-email.me> <v4dk7b$3qbnc$8@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dl3b$225kb$1@dont-email.me> <v4dn5u$3qbnd$8@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dop4$22o4a$2@dont-email.me> <v4dq07$3qbnc$12@i2pn2.org>
	<v4dqq0$2353n$1@dont-email.me> <v4el9m$3rsd6$3@i2pn2.org>
	<v4f3ec$2akmh$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 17:34:53 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="4086623"; 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: 4955
Lines: 67

Am Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:32:28 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 6/13/2024 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 6/12/24 11:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 6/12/2024 10:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 6/12/24 11:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 6/12/2024 9:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/12/24 10:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 9:06 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/12/24 9:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/2024 8:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/24 9:19 PM, olcott wrote:

>>>> You admitted that it didn't produce the "Correct Simulation" output
>>>> that it was supposed to produce.
>>> It was never supposed to produce this.
Gold.

>> But acting as a "pure simulator until ..." is NOT the same as acting as
>> a pure simulator.
>> And thus the "transform" is invalid, as shown by the fact that P(P)
>> halts even though H(P,P) uses its logic to say that it doesn't.
>> Thus, your "logic" introduces a FALSE premise into its logic, and thus
>> its conclusion is INVALID.
Nice.

>>>>> Tell me in your own words what you think COMPUTE THE MAPPING FROM
>>>>> INPUTS means.
>>>> It takes the input, and TRIES to process them to the answer
>>>> corresponding to the mapping it is supposed to be computing.

>>>> But to be a decider for a specific function, it needs to compute the
>>>> mapping that matches that function. So, A Halt Decider, to be a HALT
>>>> decider, needs to generate the exact same mapping as the Halting
>>>> mathematical function, which is defined in terms of the behavior of
>>>> the machine represented by the input.

>>>> Your H computes *A* mapping, but not the Halting Function mapping.
>>>> And the exact details of that mapping is a function of the decider
>>>> you create to try to compute it, as H and H1 generate different
>>>> answers for the D built on H (and for the D1 built on H1). Thus your
>>>> "POOP" mapping is different for each H you want to ask about, so in
>>>> one sense, isn't even a correct question to be asking.
>>>>
>>>> It isn't asking about the decider deciding on the behavior of the
>>>> input correctly simulated by itself, but the decider needing to
>>>> decide on the behavior of the input correctly simulated by a
>>>> particular H that was choosen.
>>>>
>>> Try and show the steps of the mapping that you expect in terms of D
>>> correctly simulated by H, line by line.
Exactly the steps D would take.

>> Since you call H a "Halt Decider", its criterion is, and can only be,
>> the behavior of the directly executed D(D),
> It is contingent upon you to show the exact steps of how H computes the
> mapping from the x86 machine language finite string input to H(D,D)
> using the finite string transformation rules specified by the semantics
> of the x86 programming language that reaches the behavior of the
> directly executed D(D)
Do you know about UTMs?

> When I ask anyone to show the detailed steps of the mapping from the
> machine language finite string of D to the behavior of D(D) 
You're smart enough to reason about the behaviour of D from its 
description yourself.

-- 
joes