Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Turing Computations <are> finite string transformations of inputs
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 19:30:37 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <vujtre$3gsgr$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vu6lnf$39fls$2@dont-email.me> <vua9oi$2lub6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vudkah$1ona3$1@dont-email.me> <vufi61$3k099$1@dont-email.me>
 <vugddv$b21g$2@dont-email.me> <vuh2a3$tkor$1@dont-email.me>
 <vuhjsk$1h0ma$1@dont-email.me> <vujhmf$36iqv$1@dont-email.me>
 <vujj6s$35hcg$6@dont-email.me> <vujm3c$397q3$1@dont-email.me>
 <vujn04$3a526$3@dont-email.me> <vujne4$32om9$10@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2025 02:30:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5907d57126dc5944504113eedaae67f8";
	logging-data="3699227"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ADI1bhMs5laSh/YgtHa+v"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:mEvyleLAKSFQKqLaOYbN0j1ypkw=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250426-4, 4/26/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vujne4$32om9$10@dont-email.me>

On 4/26/2025 5:41 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 4/26/2025 6:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/26/2025 5:18 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>> On 2025-04-26 15:28, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 4/26/2025 4:03 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-04-25 21:28, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/25/2025 5:28 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-04-25 10:31, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once we understand that Turing computable functions are only
>>>>>>>> allowed to derived their outputs by applying finite string
>>>>>>>> operations to their inputs then my claim about the behavior
>>>>>>>> of DD that HHH must report on is completely proven.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're very confused here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Computable functions are *functions*. That is, they are mappings 
>>>>>>> from a domain to a codomain, neither of which are required to be 
>>>>>>> strings. Functions don't involve finite string operations at all.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All Turing Machine based computation applies the/
>>>>>> finite string transformations specified by the TM
>>>>>> language to the input finite string.
>>>>>
>>>>> Turing machines and computable functions are not the same thing. 
>>>>> You keep conflating the two. The point of my post was to try to get 
>>>>> you to be more careful with your terminology.
>>>>>
>>>>> André
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes so I must correct my words to say
>>>>
>>>> All Turing Machine based *Computable Functions* apply the
>>>>  >> finite string transformations specified by the TM
>>>>  >> language to the input finite string.
>>>
>>> Which is just as mangled as your earlier usage. Maybe learn what 
>>> these things mean...
>>>
>>> André
>>>
>>
>> When HHH emulates DD once and then emulates itself
>> emulating DD according to the finite string transformation
>> rules specified by the x86 language then HHH has complete
>> proof that DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
>> reach its final halt state even after an infinite number
>> of steps of correct emulation.
>>
>>
> 
> On 4/2/2025 10:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>  > When someone totally proves their point a Troll
>  > that is only interested in naysaying would see
>  > that the point is irrefutable so they say some
>  > other nonsense such that the point was irrelevant.
> 

We all know that you are a troll and the best thing for
that is BF Skinner's Operant Conditioning: Extinction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_(psychology)

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer