Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connectionsPath: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis --- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 12:49:24 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 61 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 11:49:25 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b6be8a1756d2017ce1bbdc09eb08928c"; logging-data="2804914"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19AOdQXeZBi4n4PCG9D9W/X" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:PMtIn7XmpU600+ydErNLzti22dM= Bytes: 3750 On 2024-10-29 14:35:34 +0000, olcott said: > On 10/29/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-10-29 00:57:30 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 10/28/2024 6:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 10/28/24 11:04 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 10/28/2024 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>> The machine being used to compute the Halting Function has taken a >>>>>> finite string description, the Halting Function itself always took a >>>>>> Turing Machine, >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is incorrect. It has always been the finite string Turing Machine >>>>> description of a Turing machine is the input to the halt decider. >>>>> There are always been a distinction between the abstraction and the >>>>> encoding. >>>> >>>> Nope, read the problem you have quoted in the past. >>>> >>> >>> Ultimately I trust Linz the most on this: >>> >>> the problem is: given the description of a Turing machine >>> M and an input w, does M, when started in the initial >>> configuration qow, perform a computation that eventually halts? >>> https://www.liarparadox.org/Peter_Linz_HP_317-320.pdf >>> >>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞ >>> Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn >>> >>> Linz also makes sure to ignore that the behavior of ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ >>> correctly simulated by embedded_H cannot possibly reach >>> either ⟨Ĥ.qy⟩ or ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩ because like everyone else he rejects >>> simulation out of hand: >>> >>> We cannot find the answer by simulating the action of M on w, >>> say by performing it on a universal Turing machine, because >>> there is no limit on the length of the computation. >> >> That statement does not fully reject simulation but is correct in >> the observation that non-halting cannot be determied in finite time >> by a complete simulation so someting else is needed instead of or >> in addition to a partial simulation. Linz does include simulationg >> Turing machines in his proof that no Turing machine is a halt decider. >> > > *That people fail to agree with this and also fail to* > *correctly point out any error seems to indicate dishonestly* > *or lack of technical competence* > > DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86 > language cannot possibly reach its own "return" instruction > whether or not any HHH ever aborts its emulation of DDD. - irrelevant - couterfactual -- Mikko