Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Functions computed by Turing Machines MUST apply finite string
 transformations to inputs --- MT
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 16:49:45 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <vvgkhp$18q46$2@dont-email.me>
References: <TuuNP.2706011$nb1.2053729@fx01.ams4>
 <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> <vvgk8j$18i6e$3@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 23:49:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ee5137430f56269cd3e6381ddf24cf46";
	logging-data="1337478"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Zte+TVL4QYy6ww3aF5x8i"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8ILfd6y/P3g5G8hwMlOSpIFFoqI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vvgk8j$18i6e$3@dont-email.me>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250507-4, 5/7/2025), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

On 5/7/2025 4:44 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> 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.
> 

When correctly is defined as conforming to false
assumptions then correctly is defined incorrectly.

> 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.
> 

I don't think it make sense to continue to talk to
clueless people that lack the technical capacity
to verify key facts.

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