Path: ...!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: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:27:44 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v4ijlg$kqh$3@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> <v4ebr4$3rbs4$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v4er3t$28g4v$6@dont-email.me> <v4f033$260h$1@news.muc.de>
 <v4f214$2akmh$1@dont-email.me> <v4fa3m$3smqv$4@i2pn2.org>
 <v4hblp$2sdqr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 23:27:44 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="21329"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v4hblp$2sdqr$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3591
Lines: 48

On 6/14/24 8:05 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 6/13/2024 12:26 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:08:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 6/13/2024 9:35 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 6/13/2024 3:49 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>> Am Wed, 12 Jun 2024 18:25:14 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> 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:
>>
>>>>>>> *H DOES NOT simply guess what you think it should do and do that*
>> Indeed, it must compute and it must be right.
>>>>>> It has a *specification* it must fulfill.
>>>> The specification is "calculate whether a particular program with a
>>>> particular input halts".
>>> Yes that <is> what the textbooks say, none-the-less halt deciders really
>>> cannot read textbooks. Instead they go by the behavior that their input
>>> specifies.
>> And their programming. And we can change which machine/program we are
>> looking at, if we've got one that isn't up to spec.
>>
>>> All halt deciders compute the mapping from their inputs...
>> All Turing machines do.
>>
>>> When we actually compute 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 this
>>> DOES NOT MAP TO THE BEHAVIOR OF D(D).
> 
> It is impossible to encode the H/D pair such that
> we can even ask H: Does (D) halt you ignorant troll.
> 

If we can't, the H just failed at the begining.

But, by your definition, all we need to do is give it the full x86 
assembly code of the full program D

>> Yes, which is why H is wrong.
>>
>>> 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) *THEY CHANGE
>>> THE SUBJECT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY KNOW THAT I AM CORRECT*
>> That mapping is provided by a simulator/UTM. You even use one yourself!
>> No need to guess the wrong answer.
>>
>