Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 09:46:54 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <vs8c1u$sd2j$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$1@dont-email.me> <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> <vs4tot$1e09p$5@dont-email.me>
 <vs50dt$1c1ja$13@dont-email.me> <vs51po$1e09p$6@dont-email.me>
 <vs6nv4$39556$1@dont-email.me>
 <f5efe6f88035d477b7c12bb6f0f6471a941301ab@i2pn2.org>
 <vs6ru7$39556$8@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 09:46:54 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="13640222a42b83ce918b512af2679e23";
	logging-data="930899"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ec98AcQTl1T2cUyQnJThF"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mG/0XT5nhH1JZhwP0QBYwpjM8jE=
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vs6ru7$39556$8@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5108

Op 28.mrt.2025 om 20:05 schreef olcott:
> On 3/28/2025 1:07 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Fri, 28 Mar 2025 12:57:56 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 3/27/2025 9:33 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 3/27/2025 10:10 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:24 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 9:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> 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:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>
>>>>>>> I did not say that no TM can ever report on behavior that matches
>>>>>>> the behavior of a directly executing TM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good, because that's all that's required for a solution to the
>>>>>> halting problem:
>>>>>>
>>>>> There are sometimes when the behavior of TM Description D correctly
>>>>> simulated by UTM1 does not match the behavior correctly simulated by
>>>>> UTM2.
>>>>
>>>> Irrelevant, because to satisfy the requirements, the behavior of the
>>>> described machine when executed directly must be reported.
>>>
>>> I HAVE PROVED THAT THE REQUIREMENT IS WRONG NITWIT.
>>> A FUNCTION THAT IS REQUIRED TO COMPUTE THE SQUARE OF A BOX OF ROCKS IS
>>> ALSO INCORRECT.
> 
>> It is wrong to ask for the behaviour of the direct execution? Anyways,
>> HHH can't do it.
>>
> 
> Unless and until one TM can take another executing
> TM as an input IT IS WRONG TO REQUIRE A TM TO REPORT
> ON SOMETHING THAT IT CANNOT SEE.
> 

So we agree that the answer for the question:
'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?