Path: ...!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: Simulating termination analyzers by dummies --- What does halting
 mean?
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 00:40:28 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <v50fcc$2efr5$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v4oaqu$f9p5$1@dont-email.me> <v4os9e$i70m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4p9mb$lavj$1@dont-email.me> <v4qe53$a0nm$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4qn65$10qh6$1@dont-email.me> <v4qnkf$a0nm$5@i2pn2.org>
 <v4qpvo$10qh6$2@dont-email.me> <v4qrmd$a0nm$6@i2pn2.org>
 <v4qrr8$15beg$1@dont-email.me> <v4qsav$a0nn$3@i2pn2.org>
 <v4qtaa$15gc5$1@dont-email.me> <v4qu3p$a0nm$7@i2pn2.org>
 <v4quti$15nn8$1@dont-email.me> <v4rrge$bivn$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4s1l0$1boeu$6@dont-email.me> <v4seq5$cbcu$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v4sfuo$1enie$1@dont-email.me> <v4shpp$cbcu$2@i2pn2.org>
 <v4st0g$1hjnp$1@dont-email.me> <v4sull$2f03$1@news.muc.de>
 <v4svmn$1i267$1@dont-email.me> <v4u8cu$1o15$1@news.muc.de>
 <v4uoj9$1vpm0$10@dont-email.me> <v50ena$2ecrp$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 07:40:29 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f3edc3033c9d2f90d2fdc1ea5e7f24e7";
	logging-data="2572133"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/KiLsE55JXffMQLV2yxKfW"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:3Qh6Z8pJ0kRFohq8UkeZJA8m6GU=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v50ena$2ecrp$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3841

On 6/20/2024 12:29 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-06-19 14:05:29 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 6/19/2024 4:29 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/18/2024 4:36 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>> [ Followup-To: set ]
>>>
>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 12:57 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>> Am Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:25:44 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 12:06 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>> H0(DDD);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by any H0 cannot possibly halt.
>>>>>>>>> DDD halts iff H0 halts.
>>>
>>>>>>> So H0 returns "doesn't halt" to DDD, which then stops running,
>>>>>>> so H0 should have returned "halts".
>>>
>>>>>> This was three messages ago.
>>>>>> I had to make sure that you understood that halting
>>>>>> does not mean stopping for any reason and only includes
>>>>>> the equivalent of terminating normally.
>>>
>>>>> No.  You're wrong, here.  A turing machine is either running or it's
>>>>> halted.  There's no third alternative.  If your C programs are not 
>>>>> in one
>>>>> of these two states, they're not equivalent to turing machines.
>>>
>>>> Although I agree with this there seems to be nuances of
>>>> disagreement across the experts.
>>>
>>> I doubt that very much.  The whole point of turing machines is to remove
>>> ambiguity and unneeded features from the theory of computation.  A third
>>> alternative state is unneeded.
>>>
>>
>> Some people say that a TM can halt in a non-final state.
> 
> People may use different words to express the same facts. What some
> people call "halting in a non-final state" is called "rejecting" by
> some other people. But the facts are what they are independently of
> the words used to express them.
> 

Ambiguity and vagueness make communication less effective.
I use C because there are zero gaps in exactly what it means.

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