Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!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: Anyone that disagrees with this is not telling the truth --- V5
 --- Professor Sipser
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:49:41 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <vak3v4$2teq9$2@dont-email.me>
References: <va104l$376ed$4@dont-email.me> <va13po$376ed$7@dont-email.me>
 <d42e5d30ea5f1c067283cb04d8a7293e2117188e@i2pn2.org>
 <va24hl$3cvgv$1@dont-email.me>
 <431deaa157cdae1cae73a1b24268a61cf8ec2c1c@i2pn2.org>
 <va38qh$3ia79$1@dont-email.me>
 <7a1c569a699e79bfa146affbbae3eac7b91cd263@i2pn2.org>
 <va3f7o$3ipp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <729cc551062c13875686d266a5453a488058e81c@i2pn2.org>
 <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$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 10:49:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ca73995851a4e43d0f798fa5597db4e5";
	logging-data="3062601"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/xyqKM+XlXUlLB6t34Q6Zr"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6DXVB1KAd/qsHVIPbgXnMNjjU/s=
In-Reply-To: <va7cof$ebdg$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4063

Op 22.aug.2024 om 14:59 schreef 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.
You are the only one to suppose that and you are twisting the words of 
Sipser.
In this case the requirement is that HHH predicts the behaviour of its 
input, *without modification of code or changing the values of the 
variables*. So, no-one except you would accept that the prediction would 
be about a modified program, because that is a non-input. Surely, 
professor Sipser would accept only the prediction for an unmodified 
input as correct. So, removal of the abort code and changing the value 
of the Root variable is simply incorrect.