Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v9oa7r$1hmvf$4@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: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: key error in all the proofs --- Correction of Fred Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 21:44:59 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 61 Message-ID: <v9oa7r$1hmvf$4@dont-email.me> References: <v8jh7m$30k55$1@dont-email.me> <TyKdnc3hCNvmUyf7nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v9ekta$3necg$1@dont-email.me> <2f8c1b0943d03743fe9894937092bc2832e0a029@i2pn2.org> <v9fn50$3ta4u$2@dont-email.me> <v9hmfc$c71c$1@dont-email.me> <v9ic89$f16v$6@dont-email.me> <06ea0f3a1ff938643b3dfefdf62af15559593733@i2pn2.org> <v9iqgc$go4j$2@dont-email.me> <LcucnRYb5ZiYhyD7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v9j6ci$jo32$1@dont-email.me> <v9kdp9$srkm$1@dont-email.me> <v9ku3k$v95g$1@dont-email.me> <v9nbqr$1dmui$1@dont-email.me> <v9nf3o$1dvef$3@dont-email.me> <v9nkhd$1ertd$1@dont-email.me> <v9nmj5$1f34m$1@dont-email.me> <6590517a070695b81751db1b64c3d26019ee9b13@i2pn2.org> <v9nog5$1fe76$1@dont-email.me> <34a22fd138e2e1e41a4dd29cd6c9016064e2343c@i2pn2.org> <v9npus$1flup$2@dont-email.me> <e9c7ddb8dc4b4b03399d064d634f11297501e49d@i2pn2.org> <v9o183$1gkn7$2@dont-email.me> <2c13788e85c998e11a449b633b6b8464521c1433@i2pn2.org> <v9o4bm$1h46a$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 21:44:59 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="905ef987000159018ac19d993d3552cf"; logging-data="1629167"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/EMiIasN1J+aaPyr+bk/Aw" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:plUOyoB7iklALmBNOg6og3lnca8= In-Reply-To: <v9o4bm$1h46a$1@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-GB, nl Bytes: 4522 Op 16.aug.2024 om 20:04 schreef olcott: > On 8/16/2024 12:54 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 8/16/24 1:11 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 8/16/2024 11:47 AM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:07:08 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>>> On 8/16/2024 9:59 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>> Am Fri, 16 Aug 2024 09:42:13 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 9:28 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> On 8/16/24 10:09 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 8:34 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 2024-08-16 12:02:00 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unless an unlimited emulation of DDD by HHH can reach the "return" >>>>>>>>> instruction of DDD it is construed that this instance of DDD never >>>>>>>>> halts. >>>>>>>> But that also construes that HHH is a program that DOES an >>>>>>>> unlimited >>>>>>>> emulation of DDD, and thus isn't a decider >>>>>>> Not at all. never has. >>>>>> Yes, because DDD is defined to call its simulator. If you change the >>>>>> simulator to abort, you also change the simulated HHH. Nobody cares >>>>>> about HHH aborting a pure simulator. >>>> >>>>>>> HHH must predict what the behavior of an unlimited simulation would >>>>>>> be. >>>>>> The HHH that aborts must predict what DDD calling an aborting HHH >>>>>> does >>>>> NOT AT ALL, NEVER HAS. >>>>> PREDICT WHAT THE BEHAVIOR WOULD BE >>>>> IF IT WAS AN UNLIMITED EMULATION >>>> Yes, an unlimited simulation of an aborting HHH. >>> >>> Prediction of behavior of unlimited emulation >>> means prediction of behavior that never aborts. >>> >> >> Right, but the unlimited emulation of the DDD that calls the HHH that >> says non-halting will reach a final state. >> > > I think that you are just twisting my words again. > > _DDD() > [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping > [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping > [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD > [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) > [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 > [00002182] 5d pop ebp > [00002183] c3 ret > Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] > > The unlimited emulation of DDD by HHH never stops running. > > But the aborting HHH stops running. When this aborting HHH is simulated, the simulator must predict the behaviour the unlimited simulation of the *aborting* HHH . It is not allowed to change the input (an aborting HHH) into an non-aborting HHH. That is cheating. That is exactly what you do with the Root variable, which changes the behaviour of the input.