Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1 Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2025 08:32:45 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: <2e44884357bdbf88e78daeda376eb8946f22cfb6@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2025 08:32:45 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2360712"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM"; User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Am Sat, 29 Mar 2025 16:33:13 -0500 schrieb olcott: > On 3/29/2025 2:51 PM, joes wrote: >> Am Sat, 29 Mar 2025 13:54:22 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>> On 3/29/2025 4:19 AM, joes wrote: >> >>>> Even a constant function is a "computation", even if it doesn't >>>> actually do any work. >>> That is not transforming an input finite string into its corresponding >>> output finite string. >> Yes it is: transforming every input into the same output. > Deciders must transform inputs into accept or reject states on the basis > of a syntactic or semantic property specified by the input. If every input has length 5, you don't need to transform anything. >>>>> The actual requirement is to compute the mapping from a finite >>>>> string to its length using a sequence of algorithmic steps. >>>>> Likewise for halting. Compute the mapping from a finite string of >>>>> machine code to the behavior that this finite string specifies. >>>> Do you reckon the direct execution of a TM contradicts the >>>> specification? > Direct execution itself cannot possibly contradict anything. > Read what I said above as many times as needed to get it. I don't, that's why I ask. The direct execution of D contradicts the return value of H(D). -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.