Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 14:38:35 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 131
Message-ID: <vs6trs$39556$15@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <vrt3gv$264jb$4@dont-email.me>
 <448c82acff6b5fc1d2aa266be92df6f778ec2c6a@i2pn2.org>
 <vru5tp$38ob9$1@dont-email.me>
 <ac61f679d7ddb39b0ceaedd7f562899d36346535@i2pn2.org>
 <vrvccp$aq8m$3@dont-email.me>
 <e166831a8e02332d64ec151f61481e2629e6e53a@i2pn2.org>
 <vrvsh4$p4vd$2@dont-email.me>
 <c93030bbd81fb313c76c256c6e54beb48b07dfdd@i2pn2.org>
 <vs1vuv$2ot1m$1@dont-email.me>
 <d2f86fad6c5823e3c098f30d331576c52263b398@i2pn2.org>
 <vs2fgn$354gv$5@dont-email.me> <vs2u3v$3mcjm$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs434l$mmcb$3@dont-email.me> <vs45a3$resr$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs4ne1$1c1ja$1@dont-email.me> <vs4ovc$1e09p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs4pg8$1c1ja$6@dont-email.me> <vs4pi9$1e09p$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs4qpp$1c1ja$7@dont-email.me> <vs4r2u$1e09p$3@dont-email.me>
 <vs4snt$1c1ja$9@dont-email.me> <vs4srl$1e09p$4@dont-email.me>
 <vs4tj3$1c1ja$11@dont-email.me> <vs5qd1$2buf0$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs6sg2$39556$10@dont-email.me> <vs6sq7$2p360$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 20:38:37 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="573eb7050e522f67e4fe879678fe5346";
	logging-data="3445926"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+GBByQWiaheLtrjW5OODj9"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4UC80scKTGT5IepddgNYhP6CIDY=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250328-4, 3/28/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <vs6sq7$2p360$4@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 7267

On 3/28/2025 2:20 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 3/28/2025 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/28/2025 4:33 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 28.mrt.2025 om 02:21 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:09 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>> On 3/27/2025 9:07 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:38 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:34 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:12 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:02 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:36 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:27 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:50 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 2:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 27.mrt.2025 om 04:09 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/26/2025 8:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _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]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non-Halting is that the machine won't reach its final 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staste even if an unbounded number of steps are 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulated. Since HHH doesn't do that, it isn't showing 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-halting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH will never reach its final state
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in an unbounded number of steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH1 reaches its final state in a finite
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not very interesting to know whether a simulator 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reports that it is unable to reach the end of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation of a program that halts in direct execution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That IS NOT what HHH is reporting.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HHH correctly rejects DDD because DDD correctly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> final halt state.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In other words, HHH is not a halt decider because it is not 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> computing the required mapping:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Troll
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:19:42 PM UTC-5, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>  > In other words you could find any error in my post so you 
>>>>>>>>>>> resort to the
>>>>>>>>>>>  > lame tactic of ad hominem personal attack.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Troll
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 7/22/2024 10:51 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>  > *Ad Hominem attacks are the first resort of clueless wonders*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I corrected your error dozens of times and you
>>>>>>>> ignore these corrections and mindlessly repeat
>>>>>>>> your error like a bot 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which is what you've been doing for the last three years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Projection, as always.  I'll add the above to the list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TM's cannot possibly ever report on the behavior
>>>>>> of the direct execution of another TM. 
>>>>>
>>>>> False:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I did not say that no TM can ever report on
>>>> behavior that matches the behavior of a directly
>>>> executing TM.
>>>>
>>>> No TM can every directly see the behavior of the
>>>> direct execution of any other TM because no TM can
>>>> take a directly executing TM as an input.
>>>>
>>> So we agree that the answer for:
>>> 'Is there an algorithm that can determine for all possible inputs 
>>> whether the input specifies a program that (according to the 
>>> semantics of the machine language) halts when directly executed?'
>>> is 'no'. Correct?
>>
>> In the same way: Is there an algorithm that correctly
>> determines the square root of a box of rocks?
>>
> 
> 
> In other words, you're saying that there's a TM/input where the question 
> of whether or not it halts when executed directly has no correct yes or 
> no answer.
> 
> Show it.
> 

I proved it many times and because you are a Troll you
ignored the proof that by definition no TM can take
an executing TM as its input, thus cannot possibly
report on something that it does not see.

> Failure to do so in your next message is your on-the-record admission 
> that the above question is valid.

When include ALL of the relevant details to the question
it becomes:

What Boolean value can decider H correctly return when input
D is able to do the opposite of whatever value that H returns?

We can reject this question entirely when we discard its
false assumption. D is unable to do the opposite of whatever
value that H returns when H is a simulating halt decider.

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer