Path: ...!news.nobody.at!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: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 08:50:12 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <v75tqk$19j7l$3@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$2@dont-email.me> <v72n49$kfho$1@dont-email.me>
 <v739gj$mjis$18@dont-email.me>
 <d8b0e6093be2a1874464d11a7c38720bac7917a8@i2pn2.org>
 <v742dl$s48s$1@dont-email.me>
 <2428db89c243a7defedbf9b7588991cd00b5d7c3@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2024 15:50:12 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="37be9b12bf7e2996d459c5c7ef9a1f9b";
	logging-data="1363189"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/qdgZJpwOR4Tfv/EiKLURN"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:05BvGeoTvx5oiIpneiRewj1ej4U=
In-Reply-To: <2428db89c243a7defedbf9b7588991cd00b5d7c3@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5063

On 7/16/2024 3:17 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:56:21 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/15/2024 3:51 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:51:14 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 7/15/2024 3:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>> On 2024-07-15 03:41:24 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>> 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*
>>>>>
>>>>> That's right. But the finite string can be a description of a Turing
>>>>> machine.
>>>> No that is wrong. The finite string must encode a Turing machine.
>>> Same difference.
>> Not at all. The huge mistake of all these years is that people stupidly
>> expected that HHH to report on the behavior of its own executing Turing
>> machine. The theory of computation forbids that.
> Encoding = description.
> HHH isn't executed by anything. 

// HHH is not allowed to report on this DDD
int main() { DDD(); } invokes HHH(DDD);

> It simply reports on a string that
> represents itself.
> 
>>>>> That way a Turing machine can say someting about another Turing
>>>>> machine,
>>>> Not exactly. It can only report on the behavior that the input finite
>>>> string specifies.
>>> Which is that other TM.
> Do you agree?
> 
>>>>> even simulate its complete execution. Or it can count something
>>>>> simple like the number of states or the set of symbols that the
>>>>> described Turing machine may write but not erase. But there are
>>>>> questions that no Turing machine can answer from a description of
>>>>> another Turing machine.
>>>> All of the questions that a TM cannot answer are logical
>>>> impossibilities
>>> Not true. Some interesting questions are undecidable.
>> It is a despicable lie that it even be called "undecidable". It is like
>> no one can "make up their mind" about the square root of a dead rat.

> You may dislike the term; it means there is no program that gives
> the answer for every input.
> 

The term "undecidable input" incorrectly cites the decider
as the source of the issue instead of rejecting incorrect input.

The problem is that no program gives the answer
whether a self-contradictory input is true or false
because the correct answer is neither. It isn't
that the decider "couldn't make up ts mind" it is
that the input was invalid.

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