Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:14:26 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <vs9kb1$26cg5$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfuob$256og$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>
 <e11c6f4f29bb0c77dbd10f8e20bca766712977d0@i2pn2.org>
 <vs50kt$1c1ja$15@dont-email.me> <vs5r0j$2f37e$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs6srk$39556$12@dont-email.me> <vs6t10$2p360$6@dont-email.me>
 <vs70tc$39556$21@dont-email.me> <vs71bq$2p360$10@dont-email.me>
 <vs76m9$3m3q0$1@dont-email.me> <vs77th$2p360$11@dont-email.me>
 <vs78cu$3ms9k$1@dont-email.me>
 <c2b91231b9052e07b6705250938fb9095e711327@i2pn2.org>
 <vs7kvf$3eal$2@dont-email.me>
 <aeb75b411e9f77c974585181c671a47d03b22078@i2pn2.org>
 <vs7qdm$8dae$2@dont-email.me> <vs7r9b$8ajp$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs92l3$1fccq$5@dont-email.me> <vs93ae$1k9u2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs9g5p$1v2n9$5@dont-email.me> <vs9gcg$20g2j$3@dont-email.me>
 <vs9h9o$23cav$2@dont-email.me> <vs9hh3$20g2j$6@dont-email.me>
 <vs9jie$23cav$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2025 21:14:26 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d82829ff2684f0f25de37249bda61e80";
	logging-data="2306565"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ZFl0NZIzzg5Ab3DhB9DCb"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tPDseC8Bsl6wgvc8BaqpeC8gQg0=
In-Reply-To: <vs9jie$23cav$4@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4128

On 3/29/2025 4:01 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 3/29/2025 2:26 PM, dbush wrote:
>> On 3/29/2025 3:22 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 3/29/2025 2:06 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 3/29/2025 3:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 3/29/2025 10:23 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/29/2025 11:12 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 11:00 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/28/2025 11:45 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It defines that it must compute the mapping from
>>>>>>>>> the direct execution of a Turing Machine
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which does not require tracing an actual running TM, only 
>>>>>>>> mapping properties of the TM described. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The key fact that you continue to dishonestly ignore
>>>>>>> is the concrete counter-example that I provided that
>>>>>>> conclusively proves that the finite string of machine
>>>>>>> code input is not always a valid proxy for the behavior
>>>>>>> of the underlying virtual machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In other words, you deny the concept of a UTM, which can take a 
>>>>>> description of any Turing machine and exactly reproduce the 
>>>>>> behavior of the direct execution.
>>>>>
>>>>> I deny that a pathological relationship between a UTM and
>>>>> its input can be correctly ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In such a case, the UTM will not halt, and neither will the input 
>>>> when executed directly.
>>>
>>> It is not impossible to adapt a UTM such that it
>>> correctly simulates a finite number of steps of an
>>> input.
>>>
>>
>> 1) then you no longer have a UTM, so statements about a UTM don't apply
> 
> We can know that when this adapted UTM simulates a
> finite number of steps of its input that this finite
> number of steps were simulated correctly.

And therefore does not do a correct UTM simulation that matches the 
behavior of the direct execution as it is incomplete.

> 
>> 2) changing the input is not allowed
> 
> The input is unchanged. There never was any
> indication that the input was in any way changed.
> 

False, if the starting function calls UTM and UTM changes, you're 
changing the input.

Changing the input is not allowed.