Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 17:51:06 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <vh62da$32617$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vft4om$44tc$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vft944$25aio$6@dont-email.me>
 <11408789ed30027f4bc9a743f353dfa9b4712109@i2pn2.org>
 <QU2dnTAfup30Rr_6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vfvnml$2ll12$1@dont-email.me> <vfvujg$2mcse$6@dont-email.me>
 <vg2cqm$37cq6$1@dont-email.me> <vg2kfq$38m0h$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg4va2$3ok87$1@dont-email.me> <vg55lv$3pnvp$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg7sdl$cbfk$1@dont-email.me> <vg83vt$dri5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vgcmu4$1eurt$1@dont-email.me> <vgd5vl$1hqli$1@dont-email.me>
 <vgfv31$25h28$1@dont-email.me> <vgg1qh$26126$1@dont-email.me>
 <vgi2t6$2js8i$1@dont-email.me> <vgiqgt$2nkqv$2@dont-email.me>
 <vgl0pf$37081$1@dont-email.me> <vgl7qo$37h38$3@dont-email.me>
 <vgnbfc$3uefk$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vgnt6e$3qq7s$4@dont-email.me>
 <vgsog6$uu8r$1@dont-email.me> <vgt71t$11e5a$4@dont-email.me>
 <vgvdp1$1iie3$1@dont-email.me> <vh0lpm$1qfts$1@dont-email.me>
 <vh20gm$25pto$1@dont-email.me> <vh3bho$2e37l$5@dont-email.me>
 <vh4ei3$2o1f0$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 00:51:09 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1eac21b2b931973af1a7b8c06e3541b3";
	logging-data="3217447"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/AF698lMSmWoLzv1mk9UbE"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:T70rz7xKpXELDHy6+yC9AIm6WKY=
In-Reply-To: <vh4ei3$2o1f0$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241114-6, 11/14/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 4831

On 11/14/2024 3:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-11-13 23:08:40 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 11/13/2024 4:54 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-11-12 22:45:10 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>> Since we are only talking about Turing Machines and C functions
>>>> there is no need to get into other models.
>>>
>>> You have also talked about x86, so it is better to include that.
>>
>> That is construed as the precise details of the behavior
>> of the C function.
> 
> Doing so deviates from the meaning of "C language".
> 

Not at all. x86 is the Tarski meta-language that
specifies the precise fully concrete semantics
of the C code.

>>>>> For a C program it is more ambiguous as there are situations
>>>>> where the language standard does not specify whether the execution
>>>>> should be terminated or continued.
>>>>
>>>> Reaching the "return" instruction final halt state <is>
>>>> the only normal termination for a C function.
>>>
>>> You may call it "only normal termitaion" but there are other 
>>> terminations
>>> that need not be called "normal".
>>
>> When we preserve the mapping to Turing machines then
>> reaching the return instruction is the only correct
>> notion of a final halt state.
> 
> No, it is not. If you want to use the expression "final halt state"
> about Turing machines you must define it in terms of Turing macnine
> concepts, either as halting or as someting else.
> 

We cannot refer to any feature in C++ that Turing Machines
lack and maintain the mapping to Turing Machines. There
is no such thing as abnormal termination in TMs.

>>>> If you want to get silly you can say that a C function stuck
>>>> in an infinite loop "halts" when you yank the computer's power
>>>> cord out.
>>>
>>> That is in the same category as the "aboting" your HHH may do with
>>> certain inputs. The program does specify a next action but the
>>> specified action is not performed.
>>
>> No it is not. A emulating termination analyzer is
>> defined to abort as soon as aborting is the only way
>> to prevent its own non-termination.
> 
> If for a particular input aborting is the only way to prevent its own
> non-termination then "as soon as" can only mean before doing anything

That is a ridiculously stupid way to look at it.
<As soon as> means the point in the execution
trace where the non-halt criteria it first met.

For the current algorithm this is immediately after
HHH emulates itself emulating DDD until its emulated
HHH is about to emulated itself emulating DDD.

> and therefore before finding out that there is no other way.
> 



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