Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD specifies recursive emulation to HHH and halting to HHH1 Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 14:11:53 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 100 Message-ID: References: <8423998561d8feee807509b0ed6335123d35a7c9@i2pn2.org> <448c82acff6b5fc1d2aa266be92df6f778ec2c6a@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2025 20:11:55 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="573eb7050e522f67e4fe879678fe5346"; logging-data="3445926"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+LSC28G8vzRB07deLIQ8MM" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:S/GUbUaFYtSCAbiBLjkMH0ouURk= X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250328-4, 3/28/2025), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 5993 On 3/28/2025 9:03 AM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 3/27/25 10:13 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/27/2025 9:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 3/27/25 9:07 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 3/27/2025 7:38 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:12 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 8:11 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:02 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 7:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:27 PM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 1:50 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2025 2:18 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 27.mrt.2025 om 04:09 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/26/2025 8:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov  ebp,esp  ; housekeeping >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add  esp,+04 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop  ebp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Non-Halting is that the machine won't reach its final >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> staste even if an unbounded number of steps are emulated. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since HHH doesn't do that, it isn't showing non-halting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by any HHH will never reach its final state >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in an unbounded number of steps. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> DDD emulated by HHH1 reaches its final state in a finite >>>>>>>>>>>>>> number of steps. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not very interesting to know whether a simulator >>>>>>>>>>>>> reports that it is unable to reach the end of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation of a program that halts in direct execution. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> That IS NOT what HHH is reporting. >>>>>>>>>>>> HHH correctly rejects DDD because DDD correctly >>>>>>>>>>>> emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own >>>>>>>>>>>> final halt state. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In other words, HHH is not a halt decider because it is not >>>>>>>>>>> computing the required mapping: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Troll >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 3:19:42 PM UTC-5, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>  > In other words you could find any error in my post so you >>>>>>>>> resort to the >>>>>>>>>  > lame tactic of ad hominem personal attack. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Troll >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/22/2024 10:51 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>  > *Ad Hominem attacks are the first resort of clueless wonders* >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I corrected your error dozens of times and you >>>>>> ignore these corrections and mindlessly repeat >>>>>> your error like a bot >>>>> >>>>> Which is what you've been doing for the last three years. >>>>> >>>>> Projection, as always.  I'll add the above to the list. >>>>> >>>> >>>> TM's cannot possibly ever report on the behavior >>>> of the direct execution of another TM. I proved >>>> this many times in may ways. Ignoring these proofs >>>> IT NOT ANY FORM OF REBUTTAL. >>>> >>> >>> Sure they can. >>> >>> WHere is your proof? And what actual accepted principles is is based on? >>> >> >> No TM can take another directly executed TM as an input >> and Turing computable functions only compute the mapping >> from inputs to outputs. >> > > ThenI guess your model of compuations can't handle numbers or words with > their meanings. > No you don't you are only lying about this. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer