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: V5 --- Professor Sipser
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 22:53:14 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 119
Message-ID: <va913a$pe80$1@dont-email.me>
References: <va104l$376ed$4@dont-email.me> <va3kac$3nd5c$1@dont-email.me>
 <148bf4dd91f32379a6d81a621fb7ec3fc1e00db0@i2pn2.org>
 <va3lai$3nd5c$2@dont-email.me> <va46sd$3pr24$1@dont-email.me>
 <va4mle$3s0hu$1@dont-email.me>
 <5591ff08ed8f7b4bdf33813681e156b775efe0ec@i2pn2.org>
 <va63uu$2fo9$1@dont-email.me>
 <b0a86b6a1343ebb5f9112ae757768a7cbbc770b2@i2pn2.org>
 <va65r8$6ht7$1@dont-email.me>
 <26fadbf7b8cb5f93dbe18bffeff6e959251f9892@i2pn2.org>
 <va6b4n$7boc$1@dont-email.me>
 <b19eb2a29dacfa67f2f9ced0d03234e980f4c985@i2pn2.org>
 <va6edj$8f0p$1@dont-email.me> <va6s5i$c9tl$1@dont-email.me>
 <va7cof$ebdg$1@dont-email.me>
 <e12d5d2caec39f6964f567343dad8333a92970fe@i2pn2.org>
 <va7et1$ebdg$6@dont-email.me>
 <014d24acf43dc57225d2f616618267dd6f94bb8d@i2pn2.org>
 <va8o7n$o6er$1@dont-email.me>
 <c681fb4eb0d1402c5478af3876da12e423d36f2b@i2pn2.org>
 <va8p99$ok13$1@dont-email.me>
 <a088f0304d7d70cc24fcf1836a79723e5877709d@i2pn2.org>
 <va8tkd$p4le$1@dont-email.me>
 <60be00c59f11a2981b0a8a3f4a03552ccfd261c8@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 05:53:15 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f8a0fb7d826cb38436ab23242cfcae90";
	logging-data="833792"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19MLT1LLVDmbC36OEWC7yiY"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GVwdLX7/MjrO4YA1Usc6zOlZW8E=
In-Reply-To: <60be00c59f11a2981b0a8a3f4a03552ccfd261c8@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6545

On 8/22/2024 10:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/22/24 10:54 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/22/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/22/24 9:39 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/22/2024 8:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/22/24 9:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/22/2024 7:54 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/22/24 9:36 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/22/2024 8:21 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am Thu, 22 Aug 2024 07:59:59 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/22/2024 3:16 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 22.aug.2024 om 06:22 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>>>       If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its 
>>>>>>>>>> input D until
>>>>>>>>>>       H correctly determines that its simulated D would never 
>>>>>>>>>> stop
>>>>>>>>>>       running unless aborted then
>>>>>>>>>>       H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>>>>>>       specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>>>>>>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 
>>>>>>>>>> 10/13/2022>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We swap the word "determines" for "predicts"
>>>>>>>>>> When we swap thew word "halt decider" for "termination 
>>>>>>>>>> analyzer" the
>>>>>>>>>> above is translated from computer science into software 
>>>>>>>>>> engineering.
>>>>>>>>>> The second half proves that this is the H that aborts that is 
>>>>>>>>>> making the
>>>>>>>>>> prediction of the behavior of D when emulated by a 
>>>>>>>>>> hypothetical version
>>>>>>>>>> of itself then never aborts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> THIS EXACTLY MATCHES THE SIPSER APPROVED CRITERIA The finite 
>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH(DDD)
>>>>>>>>>>>> emulates itself emulating DDD exactly once and this is 
>>>>>>>>>>>> sufficient for
>>>>>>>>>>>> this HHH to predict what a different HHH(DDD) do that never 
>>>>>>>>>>>> aborted
>>>>>>>>>>>> its emulation of its input.
>>>>>>>>>>> But that different hypothetical HHH is a non-input.
>>>>>>>>>> HHH is supposed to predict what the behavior of DDD would be 
>>>>>>>>>> if it did
>>>>>>>>>> not abort its emulation of DDD that is what the words that 
>>>>>>>>>> Professor
>>>>>>>>>> agreed to mean.
>>>>>>>>> If IT didn’t abort DDD calling its aborting self.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know how you twist words to get that.
>>>>>>>> HHH is required to predict the behavior of DDD
>>>>>>>> as if every HHH had its abort code removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But that isn't the input, so that is just a LIE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PREDICT HYPOTHETICAL BEHAVIOR
>>>>> Nope, Predict the ACTUAL behavior.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are just admitting you are lying about the 
>>>>
>>>> That is NOT what the words actually say.
>>>> I hope you don't get condemned to Hell over this.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, it is, at least when you understand the TECHNICAL meaning of the 
>>> words in Computation Theory.
>>
>> Termination analyzers in software engineering are
>> isomorphic to partial halt deciders in computer
>> science you really can't get away with saying otherwise
>> and not look foolish.
> 
> Then they must follow the same rules (or you are lying that they are 
> isomoprhic).
> 
> Deciders of program behavior must be given PROGRAMS, which always 
> contain ALL of the code used by it, thus for DDD, it includes the HHH 
> that it calls.
> 

It was ridiculous that you ever assumed otherwise.

> Incomplete descriptions that just don't contain everything are just 
> incorrect.
> 
> Also, "Termination analyzers" are NOT the same thing as a Halt Deciders, 
> as the term "Termination Analyzers" refer to something that decides if a 
> given program will Halt on ALL POSSIBLE inputs, rather than the specific 
> given input that a Halt Decider decides on.
> 

So you don't know what "isomorphic" means.
It does not mean identical in every respect.
Maybe "functionally equivalent" is easy for you.

> Sorry, you are just proving your ignorance of what you are trying to 
> talk about.
> 

It is not I that am proving ignorance.
You didn't know what "isomorphic means"

>>
>>> Something you are just IGNORANT of.
>>>
>>> Sorry, you are just proving your utter stupidty by your instance of 
>>> talking about something you haven't actually studied by just think 
>>> you know.
>>
>>



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