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: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH --- very stupid requirement Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 17:21:15 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 46 Message-ID: References: <7eb818791abdbf7830165a16375b0aa7c82be013@i2pn2.org> <456fe60036f85dd602289d0790b9c4768aa531b1@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:21:16 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="de9c75e0e594a6c6f2c98c0fd19b8497"; logging-data="3490338"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/C1XimHFZp6ZRqT8XUuJWK" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:nLrGl3w7WxSoBzWDJw732IHMb2c= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250227-10, 2/27/2025), Outbound message Bytes: 4380 On 2/27/2025 2:42 PM, joes wrote: > Am Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:25:20 -0600 schrieb olcott: >> On 2/27/2025 9:55 AM, joes wrote: >>> Am Thu, 27 Feb 2025 09:26:14 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 2/27/2025 1:42 AM, joes wrote: >>>>> Am Wed, 26 Feb 2025 22:34:31 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>> On 2/26/2025 9:50 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>>> Am Wed, 26 Feb 2025 08:45:50 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>> On 2/26/2025 3:29 AM, joes wrote: >>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 25 Feb 2025 20:13:43 -0600 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/2025 5:41 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The behavior of DD emulated by HHH only refers to DD and the >>>>>>>>>> fact that HHH emulates this DD. >>>>>>>>> On on hand, the simulator can have no influence on the execution. >>>>>>>>> On the other, that same simulator is part of the program. >>>>>>>>> You don't understand this simple entanglement. >>>>>>>> Unless having no influence causes itself to never terminate then >>>>>>>> the one influence that it must have is stopping the emulation of >>>>>>>> this input. >>>>>>> No. Changing the simulator changes the input, because the input >>>>>>> calls that simulator. >>>>>> In other words you are requiring simulating termination analyzers to >>>>>> get stuck in infinite execution. That is a stupid requirement. >>>>> I don't make the rules. You are the one constructing infinite >>>>> recursion. >>>> Your requirement that a simulating termination analyzer / halt decider >>>> must get stuck in infinite recursion remains very stupid. >>> I mean, it IS simulating itself. That's the whole POINT. >> When-so-ever any correct simulating termination analyzer correctly >> determines that it must abort the simulation of its input to prevent its >> own infinite execution it is always correct to reject this input finite >> string as specifying non terminating behavior. > If HHH really aborts, it doesn't get stuck in infinite recursion and > doesn't need to be aborted in the first place. > (1) You are starving to death (2) You get something to eat (3) You are no longer starving (4) Therefore you never needed to eat. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer