Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Functions computed by Turing Machines MUST apply finite string
 transformations to inputs --- MT
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 22:44:51 +0100
Organization: Fix this later
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <vvgk8j$18i6e$3@dont-email.me>
References: <TuuNP.2706011$nb1.2053729@fx01.ams4>
 <vv0kpi$3djh5$1@dont-email.me> <vv13ro$3r3ei$1@dont-email.me>
 <vv160a$3smj7$1@dont-email.me> <vv18s7$3uer0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vv1b03$4a4k$2@dont-email.me> <vv1bav$3ra6l$7@dont-email.me>
 <vv1frt$97hp$1@dont-email.me> <vv1gfu$3ra6l$8@dont-email.me>
 <vv1js4$d4ik$1@dont-email.me>
 <-GOdnZvgEPn-84j1nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vv5e46$3rtqo$1@dont-email.me>
 <2qydnbbWA6CAGIv1nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <87frhjamvt.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vv93tq$383jd$1@dont-email.me>
 <d3d98f966d50e250c233a6e883a4947c885bd99f@i2pn2.org>
 <vvbsjf$1us1f$5@dont-email.me>
 <313c6e5a3816ff483563120b589b22d1bc190c2f@i2pn2.org>
 <vvdi2p$3cbpq$7@dont-email.me> <vvdmam$3huo6$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvdn4i$3k2gc$2@dont-email.me> <vvfbt6$ubvt$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvfi2a$10b0m$4@dont-email.me> <vvfsor$130t3$2@dont-email.me>
 <6c627041e7df24bb64442ad7e0ee03db6a74aab6@i2pn2.org>
 <vvg9sm$15e69$6@dont-email.me> <vvgao0$158tp$7@dont-email.me>
 <vvge2n$15e69$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 23:44:51 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1de3d45e2783553e22f3c2216cb20b34";
	logging-data="1329358"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/tLQ0phzZzE9TY3Nlc/1h5M/ISiGW/ZhPGQc8qgBBavA=="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gauwgzwZLgIJ51zbCxpQP+7l5UE=
In-Reply-To: <vvge2n$15e69$10@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB

On 07/05/2025 20:59, olcott wrote:
> On 5/7/2025 2:02 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 07/05/2025 19:47, olcott wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> HHH did not abort its input. That is the ONLY way that
>>> simulating halt deciders can possibly work.
>>
>> Another only is that simulating halt deciders (like 
>> code-parsing halt deciders) can only possibly work if they 
>> don't claim to be universal.
>>
> 
> That is why I switched to "termination analyzer" as
> long as it correctly determines the halt status on one
> single input that has no inputs then it is correct.

Except that it fails to analyse its input program correctly.

You will accept, I think, that your 'analysis' consists of 
simulating the input program. Since by your own admission the 
simulation fails to simulate the whole program, however, if by 
some chance it produces the right answer it's more by luck than 
judgement. If you're going to guess the answer, why bother to 
write a program? Just toss a coin.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within