Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vbeo35$q1bv$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: Defining a correct halt decider
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 14:12:37 +0300
Organization: -
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <vbeo35$q1bv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vb4npj$1kg8k$1@dont-email.me> <vb6i8p$39fhi$1@dont-email.me> <vb72a4$3b4ub$6@dont-email.me> <vbbn7t$8ocm$1@dont-email.me> <vbcca2$bdtb$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 13:12:38 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d2806f8404483309abc03a5fad54b0c1";
	logging-data="853375"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185sGo6KlHJVbAqWGn2qFm3"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:n/dbqINS+uiBl7y/KLD2iz4/e9I=
Bytes: 2859

On 2024-09-05 13:39:14 +0000, olcott said:

> On 9/5/2024 2:39 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-09-03 13:17:56 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 9/3/2024 3:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-09-02 16:06:11 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> A correct halt decider is a Turing machine T with one accept state and 
>>>>> one reject state such that:
>>>>> 
>>>>> If T is executed with initial tape contents equal to an encoding of 
>>>>> Turing machine X and its initial tape contents Y, and execution of a 
>>>>> real machine X with initial tape contents Y eventually halts, the 
>>>>> execution of T eventually ends up in the accept state and then stops.
>>>>> 
>>>>> If T is executed with initial tape contents equal to an encoding of 
>>>>> Turing machine X and its initial tape contents Y, and execution of a 
>>>>> real machine X with initial tape contents Y does not eventually halt, 
>>>>> the execution of T eventually ends up in the reject state and then 
>>>>> stops.
>>>> 
>>>> Your "definition" fails to specify "encoding". There is no standard
>>>> encoding of Turing machines and tape contents.
>>> 
>>> That is why I made the isomorphic x86utm system.
>>> By failing to have such a concrete system all kinds
>>> of false assumptions cannot be refuted.
>> 
>> If it were isnomorphic the same false assumtipns would apply to both.
> 
> They do yet I cannot provide every single details of
> the source-code of the Turing machine because these
> details would be too overwhelming.
> 
> So instead every author makes a false assumption that
> is simply believed to be true with no sufficient basis
> to show that it isn't true.
> 
> Once I prove my point as the x86 level I show how the
> same thing applies to the Peter Linz proof.

Your recent presentations are so far from Linz' proof that they
look totally unrelated.

-- 
Mikko