Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: How the requirements that Professor Sipser agreed to are exactly
 met
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 14:20:52 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <vvte62$15ceh$18@dont-email.me>
References: <vvte01$14pca$29@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 20:20:51 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d587ba6f088c47ed8fd2ad250ebfd646";
	logging-data="1225169"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18omSjcRrfVF9Fy8Wtgeu9T"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4KM9KeOv0RPNa1/oHKegiv8jVgQ=
In-Reply-To: <vvte01$14pca$29@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US

On 5/12/2025 2:17 PM, olcott wrote:
> Introduction to the Theory of Computation 3rd Edition
> by Michael Sipser (Author)
> 4.4 out of 5 stars    568 rating
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael-Sipser/ 
> dp/113318779X
> 
> int DD()
>   {
>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>    if (Halt_Status)
>      HERE: goto HERE;
>    return Halt_Status;
>   }
> 
> DD correctly simulated by any pure simulator
> named HHH cannot possibly terminate thus proving
> that this criteria has been met:
> 
> <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
> 
>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>   </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
> 

Which is not what you thought he agreed to:


On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
 > I exchanged emails with him about this. He does not agree with anything
 > substantive that PO has written. I won't quote him, as I don't have
 > permission, but he was, let's say... forthright, in his reply to me.