Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 -- Ben agrees that Sipser approved
 criteria is met
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 17:25:13 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v5k79o$19nfi$1@i2pn2.org>
References: <v45tec$4q15$1@dont-email.me> <v4rvil$1boeu$2@dont-email.me>
	<v4s9hj$1dnm7$1@dont-email.me> <v4sa0h$1dk9i$3@dont-email.me>
	<v4sci6$1ebce$1@dont-email.me> <v4sd35$1eb2f$5@dont-email.me>
	<v4u3jl$1se49$1@dont-email.me> <v4umvh$1vpm0$7@dont-email.me>
	<v50d8k$2e51s$1@dont-email.me> <v50dtp$2e5ij$1@dont-email.me>
	<v51f4t$2k8ar$1@dont-email.me> <v51ge4$2kbbe$2@dont-email.me>
	<v539bk$329sv$1@dont-email.me> <v53upb$35vak$6@dont-email.me>
	<v575pl$3sg5p$1@dont-email.me> <v5767s$3soh6$1@dont-email.me>
	<v5e28t$11urb$5@i2pn2.org> <v5eg03$1ikpr$2@dont-email.me>
	<v5eho7$24l4$1@news.muc.de> <87jzidm83f.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v5el8c$24l4$4@news.muc.de> <v5evoi$1lgoi$1@dont-email.me>
	<v5frvn$14bcm$6@i2pn2.org> <v5ft1p$1uc3o$2@dont-email.me>
	<v5fu24$14bcn$2@i2pn2.org> <v5fuf7$1up2o$1@dont-email.me>
	<v5gk7m$22b20$1@dont-email.me> <v5h3aj$24jbd$5@dont-email.me>
	<v5j4p0$2ksq3$1@dont-email.me> <v5jrrq$2o58l$4@dont-email.me>
	<v5k0ru$2q29e$1@dont-email.me> <v5k5ko$2qsdr$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 17:25:13 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1367538"; 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: 4409
Lines: 57

Am Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:56:56 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 6/27/2024 10:35 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-27 14:10:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>> On 6/27/2024 2:36 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-06-26 12:58:59 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>> On 6/26/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-06-26 02:29:59 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>> On 6/25/2024 9:23 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/25/24 10:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/2024 8:47 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/24 1:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/2024 9:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/25/2024 4:22 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:47:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/22/2024 1:39 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 21.jun.2024 om 15:21 schreef olcott:

>>>>> If this was true then everyone here would already know that H(P,P)
>>>>> is not even being asked about the behavior of the directly executed
>>>>> P(P).
>>>>
>>>> Everyone knwos that H(P,P) is not asked anything.
>>>>
>>> In computability theory and computational complexity theory, a
>>> decision problem is a computational problem that can be posed as a
>>> yes–no question of the input values.
>> 
>> That's right. But that question cannot be presented to the decider.
>> Only the input values can.
>>
> In other words you are saying that Turing machines do not typically
> understand English.
No. The input is merely a variable in the question. The question is
implicit. 

> None-the-less no-one here understands that every halt decider is only
> required to report on the behavior that its actual input actually maps
> to.
That is a tautology: „It must simulate that way that it can.”
But it is not free to make something up and claim itself infallible

> Instead everyone here expects that the halt decider must map to the
> English description of what the authors of textbooks expect it to map
> to.
That is the definition of a halt decider. If it does not fit that
definition, it is not one.

> *DDD simulated by H0 DOES NOT HALT*
*incorrectly
Yes, it does not halt. That is a wrong simulation, as DDD does halt.

> Everyone here stupidly ignores that the pathological relationship that
> DDD calls H0(DDD) changes the behavior of DDD.
A simulator can’t change the behaviour of its input, it is bound by it.