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: Halting Problem: What Constitutes Pathological Input
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 10:31:00 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <vvfubk$130t3$5@dont-email.me>
References: <GE4SP.47558$VBab.42930@fx08.ams4> <vvb4ok$o4v0$9@dont-email.me>
 <vvb52g$15u5b$6@dont-email.me> <vvb5ca$o4v0$10@dont-email.me>
 <vvb5vp$15u5b$7@dont-email.me> <vvb675$o4v0$11@dont-email.me>
 <vvb9d7$1av94$3@dont-email.me> <vvbani$1b6l1$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvbb6s$1av94$4@dont-email.me> <vvbcb3$1b6l1$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvbe0j$1av94$8@dont-email.me> <vvbecc$1b6l1$6@dont-email.me>
 <vvbhk0$1ijna$1@dont-email.me> <vvbjjg$1kegb$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvbk93$1l4cf$1@dont-email.me> <vvbkft$1kegb$4@dont-email.me>
 <vvbl71$1ljaj$1@dont-email.me> <vvbma3$1kegb$5@dont-email.me>
 <vvbmp0$1ljaj$2@dont-email.me> <vvbqd5$1tr5o$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvbrha$1us1f$1@dont-email.me>
 <b5dffdb99fdbfe0cd74914de4d51abe0aa439e7d@i2pn2.org>
 <vvdj0r$3cbpq$9@dont-email.me>
 <db8999eda88b9152608e58380b8ef7d00862dbaa@i2pn2.org>
 <vvdrtn$3n3t4$3@dont-email.me>
 <897025cb9afe82ccb07aeec07105405542f10188@i2pn2.org>
 <vvefcn$89u0$4@dont-email.me>
 <c94910051b25e3c6273bba53e703c04600e0b0d3@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 17:31:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ee5137430f56269cd3e6381ddf24cf46";
	logging-data="1147811"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/KmSFu76tXGld9pQqEovgH"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jsY+kQEea9S14KLvkTKYzPQaNXE=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250507-2, 5/7/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
In-Reply-To: <c94910051b25e3c6273bba53e703c04600e0b0d3@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5468

On 5/7/2025 5:55 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/6/25 10:09 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/6/2025 5:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/6/25 4:37 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/6/2025 3:22 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Tue, 06 May 2025 13:05:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 5/6/2025 5:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/5/25 10:18 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/5/2025 8:59 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/5/2025 8:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/5/2025 7:49 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> DO COMPUTE THAT THE INPUT IS NON-HALTING IFF (if and only 
>>>>>>>>>>>> if) the
>>>>>>>>>>>> mapping FROM INPUTS IS COMPUTED.
>>>>>>>>>>> i.e. it is found to map something other than the above function
>>>>>>>>>>> which is a contradiction.
>>>>>>>>>> The above function VIOLATES COMPUTER SCIENCE. You make no 
>>>>>>>>>> attempt to
>>>>>>>>>> show how my claim THAT IT VIOLATES COMPUTER SCIENCE IS 
>>>>>>>>>> INCORRECT you
>>>>>>>>>> simply take that same quote from a computer science textbook 
>>>>>>>>>> as the
>>>>>>>>>> infallible word-of-God.
>>>>> What does it violate?
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All you are doing is showing that you don't understand proof by
>>>>>>>>> contradiction,
>>>>>>>> Not at all. The COMPUTER SCIENCE of your requirements IS WRONG!
>>>>>>> No, YOU don't understand what Computer Science actually is talking
>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>> Every function computed by a model of computation must apply a 
>>>>>> specific
>>>>>> sequence of steps that are specified by the model to the actual 
>>>>>> finite
>>>>>> string input.
>>>>
>>>>> You are very confused. An algorithm or program computes a function.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nothing computes a function unless it applies a specific
>>>> set of rules to its actual input to derive its output.
>>>> Anything that ignores its input is not computing a function.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right, so HHH needs to apply the rules that it was designed with.
>>>
>>> And that means it breaks the criteria that you say it needs to do to 
>>> get the right answer,
>>>
>>> And thus it gets the wrong answer.
>>>
>>
>> It needs to emulate DD according to the rules of
>> the x86 language. This includes emulating itself
>> emulating DD until it recognizes that if it kept
>> doing this that DD would never halt.
> 
> No, to be a correct emulator it needs to continue until it reaches the end,
> 
> It can get the right answer if it emulates the input to the point that 
> it can show that a
> 
> 
>>
>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>>      If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
>>      input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
>>      *would never stop running unless aborted* then
> 
> Right, that UTM(D) would never halt.
> 
>>
>> *would never stop running unless aborted*
>> Is the hypothetical HHH/DD pair where HHH does not abort.
> 
> 
> Nope, can't change DD, it is your hypothetical HHH, which has become 
> UTM, when given the ORIGINAL DD, which calls the ORIGINAL HHH, as that 
> code was part of the definition of DD.

HHH bases its decision on what the behavior of DD
would be if a hypothetical version of its own self
never aborted.

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