Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v8v730$29l8n$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 10:17:52 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 96 Message-ID: <v8v730$29l8n$1@dont-email.me> References: <v8jh7m$30k55$1@dont-email.me> <v8lm80$3h8m2$3@dont-email.me> <7295d80cad171cd65cc39845362189aa88adca4f@i2pn2.org> <v8lr4u$3iali$1@dont-email.me> <c949dfc8c7354f19a3a3d31325ee9847be91f333@i2pn2.org> <v8lt59$3iali$2@dont-email.me> <74c4fe66234c5332f4ec6032bc55cc6c5f038aee@i2pn2.org> <v8lv3a$3j30t$1@dont-email.me> <9fb36dd006e570bf987f882a8310bc13e8fc04a7@i2pn2.org> <v8m331$3ju7r$1@dont-email.me> <3ecbe8eddd0f3644c7045e937ccaf6ddc1cdb3a9@i2pn2.org> <v8m5a5$3kbok$1@dont-email.me> <de8528a486cdc94aec9fc7dc3d0195fdce3b4fbe@i2pn2.org> <v8m93b$3l8jv$1@dont-email.me> <c50f1d87c5e386a7c388c982a4f7da8c5889e493@i2pn2.org> <v8ma68$3lgfl$1@dont-email.me> <03571f185bf16590c5e535908467086b1efaffef@i2pn2.org> <v8meta$3ma4t$1@dont-email.me> <b1e8c0c9b69cc026f777b37bbd49af5d2afddd21@i2pn2.org> <v8mqt0$3s736$1@dont-email.me> <1c483f9a972618a0db5c00e03b894c3fe6adc1fa@i2pn2.org> <v8nsho$1n09$4@dont-email.me> <v8pv8a$if6p$1@dont-email.me> <4-qdnbVw1JztSi37nZ2dnZfqlJydnZ2d@giganews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2024 09:17:52 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="309a9fad157fc17c9a7da32f6d0fe325"; logging-data="2413847"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+HKzNqfXPFcxOw91TtHLed" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:EqRJnLxdZKy9vyTQA/mOZu08yUw= Bytes: 5250 On 2024-08-05 13:45:19 +0000, olcott said: > On 8/5/2024 2:33 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-08-04 12:35:04 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 8/4/2024 6:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 8/3/24 11:00 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 8/3/2024 9:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 8/3/24 7:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/3/2024 5:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 8/3/24 6:15 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 8/3/2024 5:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The problem is that every one of those emulation is of a *DIFFERENT* >>>>>>>>>> input, so they don't prove anything together except that each one >>>>>>>>>> didn't go far enough. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> void DDD() >>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>> HHH(DDD); >>>>>>>>> return; >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When each HHH correctly emulates 0 to infinity steps of >>>>>>>>> its corresponding DDD and none of them reach the "return" >>>>>>>>> halt state of DDD then even the one that emulated infinite >>>>>>>>> steps of DDD did not emulate enough steps? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Just says lying YOU. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You got any source for that other than yourself? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is self-evident and you know it. I do have four >>>>>>> people (two with masters in CS) that attest to that. >>>>>>> *It is as simple as I can possibly make it* >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe to your mind filled with false facts, but it isn't true. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I wonder how you think that you are not swearing your >>>>>>> allegiance to that father of lies? >>>>>> >>>>>> Because, I know I speak the truth. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why do you not think you are lying? >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Anyone that truly understands infinite recursion knows >>>>>>> that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach >>>>>>> its own "return" final state. >>>>>> >>>>>> Right, but for every other HHH, which the ones that answer are, it >>>>>> isn't a fact. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Surpisingly (to me) Jeff Barnett set the record straight >>>>>>> on exactly what halting means. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No, there is one, and only one definition, it is a machine that reaches >>>>>> its final state. >>>>>> >>>>>> Note, *a machine*, not a (partial) emulation of the machine >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You already know that a complete emulation of a non-ending >>>>> sequence is impossible and you already acknowledged that >>>>> DDD emulated by HHH that never aborts is non-ending. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> WHy do you say it is impossible, it just takes forever, >>> >>> A complete emulation is after all of the instructions have been >>> emulated. That never happens with any infinite execution. >> >> No, that is not what the words mean. A complete emulation is one that is >> continued as long as it can be continued. THe emulation is completed when >> all of its instructions are executed. A complete emulaton that can be >> continues forever is complete but never completed. > > That is incorrect. A completed task is a task where > there are no more steps to be accomplished. That you agree does not mean that I was wrong (though it certainly means that I should check one more time, and I did, and found some typos but no substantial error). -- Mikko