Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Who knows that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own return instruction final state? BUT ONLY that DDD Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 10:33:30 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 86 Message-ID: References: <7295d80cad171cd65cc39845362189aa88adca4f@i2pn2.org> <74c4fe66234c5332f4ec6032bc55cc6c5f038aee@i2pn2.org> <9fb36dd006e570bf987f882a8310bc13e8fc04a7@i2pn2.org> <3ecbe8eddd0f3644c7045e937ccaf6ddc1cdb3a9@i2pn2.org> <03571f185bf16590c5e535908467086b1efaffef@i2pn2.org> <1c483f9a972618a0db5c00e03b894c3fe6adc1fa@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 09:33:31 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bbfb59f828059e193a33ed558dfca0d5"; logging-data="605401"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+GFKy2VaFyMyFJ6X3IAm5h" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:mzTV2L5qqGTI9AUELYLOpldPI+Q= Bytes: 4763 On 2024-08-04 12:35:04 +0000, olcott said: > On 8/4/2024 6:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 8/3/24 11:00 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 8/3/2024 9:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 8/3/24 7:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 8/3/2024 5:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> On 8/3/24 6:15 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>> On 8/3/2024 5:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The problem is that every one of those emulation is of a *DIFFERENT* >>>>>>>> input, so they don't prove anything together except that each one >>>>>>>> didn't go far enough. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> void DDD() >>>>>>> { >>>>>>>    HHH(DDD); >>>>>>>    return; >>>>>>> } >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When each HHH correctly emulates 0 to infinity steps of >>>>>>> its corresponding DDD and none of them reach the "return" >>>>>>> halt state of DDD then even the one that emulated infinite >>>>>>> steps of DDD did not emulate enough steps? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Just says lying YOU. >>>>>> >>>>>> You got any source for that other than yourself? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It is self-evident and you know it. I do have four >>>>> people (two with masters in CS) that attest to that. >>>>> *It is as simple as I can possibly make it* >>>> >>>> Maybe to your mind filled with false facts, but it isn't true. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I wonder how you think that you are not swearing your >>>>> allegiance to that father of lies? >>>> >>>> Because, I know I speak the truth. >>>> >>>> Why do you not think you are lying? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Anyone that truly understands infinite recursion knows >>>>> that DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach >>>>> its own "return" final state. >>>> >>>> Right, but for every other HHH, which the ones that answer are, it >>>> isn't a fact. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Surpisingly (to me) Jeff Barnett set the record straight >>>>> on exactly what halting means. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, there is one, and only one definition, it is a machine that reaches >>>> its final state. >>>> >>>> Note, *a machine*, not a (partial) emulation of the machine >>>> >>> >>> You already know that a complete emulation of a non-ending >>> sequence is impossible and you already acknowledged that >>> DDD emulated by HHH that never aborts is non-ending. >>> >>> >>> >> >> WHy do you say it is impossible, it just takes forever, > > A complete emulation is after all of the instructions have been > emulated. That never happens with any infinite execution. No, that is not what the words mean. A complete emulation is one that is continued as long as it can be continued. THe emulation is completed when all of its instructions are executed. A complete emulaton that can be continues forever is complete but never completed. -- Mikko