Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis ---
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 07:19:52 -0400
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <vft4oo$44tc$3@i2pn2.org>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vflue8$3nvp8$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmd8m$k2m7$1@dont-email.me>
 <bcd82d9f8a987d3884220c0df7b8f7204cb9de3e@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmueh$mqn9$1@dont-email.me>
 <ff039b922cabbb6d44f90aa71a52d8c2f446b6ab@i2pn2.org>
 <vfo95k$11qs1$1@dont-email.me> <vfp8c0$3tobi$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfpbtq$1837o$2@dont-email.me> <vfq4h9$1fo1n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfqpi3$1iaob$4@dont-email.me> <vfqsng$1gikg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfqt7a$1jg6i$3@dont-email.me> <vfqucl$3v4c4$13@i2pn2.org>
 <vfqvkd$1k5er$1@dont-email.me> <vfs1ff$2ci0$4@i2pn2.org>
 <vfs2m3$1q2ou$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:19:52 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="136108"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vfs2m3$1q2ou$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3304
Lines: 46

On 10/29/24 9:38 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 10/29/2024 8:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 10/29/24 11:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 10/29/2024 10:18 AM, joes wrote:
>>>> Am Tue, 29 Oct 2024 09:58:50 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 10/29/2024 9:50 AM, Andy Walker wrote:
>>>>>> On 29/10/2024 13:56, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> To the best of my knowledge no one besides me ever came up with the
>>>>>>> idea of making a simulating halt decider / emulating termination
>>>>>>> analyzer.
>>>>>>       The /idea/ is ancient, and certainly dates back at least to
>>>>>>       the
>>>>>> 1970s.  For a relatively informal discussion, see paragraph 3 of
>>>>>>     http://www.cuboid.me.uk/anw/G12FCO/lect18.html
>>>>>>
>>>>> The word "simulate" or "UTM" or "interpret" was not there.
>>>>> Let me know what keyword to search for I have to prepare my house 
>>>>> for my
>>>>> cancer treatment.
>>>> The key word is "see". Oh wait, that's "emulate", which you haven't
>>>> explained the relevant difference from simulation of. Please keep
>>>> us posted about your health.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The good news about my health is that I will probably
>>> not be dead very soon.
>>>
>>> An x86 emulation has a 100% perfectly exact standard
>>> such that anyone disagreeing is unequivocally wrong.
>>> A simulation is much more vague.
>>
>> Right, assuming it is a COMPLETE x86 emulation, which HHH doesn't do.
>>
> 
> Requiring the complete emulation of a non-terminating input is
> a complete jackass thing to say because no one could be that stupid.
> 

WHy? if that is what is NEEDED to get the right answer?

Only a complete jackass would think the WRONG answer was right.

You are starting with the FALSE PRESUMPTION that the function *IS* 
computable, when that is what the ultimate question is.

THe fact that it might require "infinite work" to determine is part of 
what makes Halting non-computable.