Path: ...!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: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:35:06 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <v73c2q$mjis$20@dont-email.me>
References: <v6un9t$3nufp$1@dont-email.me> <v7013v$2ccv$1@dont-email.me>
 <v70nt7$61d8$6@dont-email.me>
 <58fc6559638120b31e128fe97b5e955248afe218@i2pn2.org>
 <v71mjh$bp3i$1@dont-email.me>
 <1173a460ee95e0ca82c08abecdefc80ba86646ac@i2pn2.org>
 <v71okl$bvm2$1@dont-email.me>
 <5f6daf68f1b4ffac854d239282bc811b5b806659@i2pn2.org>
 <v71ttb$crk4$1@dont-email.me>
 <60e7a93cb8cec0afb68b3e40a0e82e9d63fa8e2a@i2pn2.org>
 <v725p4$hlvg$2@dont-email.me>
 <33c3c28d5458eafcc934040353e4e51b376bd14f@i2pn2.org>
 <v7350v$mjis$3@dont-email.me>
 <027a58b80e88784ef5b3b6df9acbff84c0896fc0@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:35:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="13997779445f04dacae82f025877e637";
	logging-data="740956"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18HXrMSwDAukt7ew94gKoTR"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:yB5cUr1iFGcOwAgGghMajebj9Kk=
In-Reply-To: <027a58b80e88784ef5b3b6df9acbff84c0896fc0@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4056

On 7/15/2024 8:49 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 07:34:39 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/15/2024 4:03 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Sun, 14 Jul 2024 22:41:24 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 7/14/2024 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 7/14/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non termination of
>>>>>> simulating termination analyzer HHH necessarily specifies
>>>>>> non-halting behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>>>> Excpet, as I have shown, it doesn't.
>>>>> Your problem is you keep on ILEGALLY changing the input in your
>>>>> argument because you have misdefined what the input is.
>>> Specifically, the input HHH aborts.
>>>
>>>>> The input to HHH is ALL of the memory that it would be accessed in a
>>>>> correct simulation of DDD, which includes all the codd of HHH, and
>>>>> thus, if you change HHH you get a different input.
>>>>> If you want to try to claim the input is just the bytes of the
>>>>> function DDD proper then you are just admitting that you are nothing
>>>>> more than a lying idiot that doesn't understand the problem,
>>>> Turing machines only operate on finite strings they do not operate on
>>>> other Turing machines *dumbo*
>>> Don't deflect. HHH as part of DDD (because it is called) needs to be
>>> included in the input to the simulator.
>>> Bedsides, TMs can be encoded as strings. Notwithstanding that HHH is
>>> not and does not simulate a TM.
>> Richard insists that HHH report on the behavior of the TM that is *not*
>> encoded as finite string. TM's are not allowed to report on the behavior
>> of the computation that they are contained within.
> What TM do you mean? They can all be encoded.
> TMs CAN report on their input, if we arrange for it to be the same as
> their environment.
> 
>> The question is not whether or not HHH halts.
>> The question is does the finite string input to HHH mathematically map
>> to behavior that halts
> And the answer is yes, as you have agreed.
>> when DDD is correctly emulated by HHH according
>> to the semantics of the x86 language?

> If HHH can't map it, it is not simulating correctly.
> 

I have proven otherwise yet you either don't have sufficient
technical competence with the x86 language or don't mind
disagreeing with verified facts.


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