Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 57,761 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Richard Damon    |
|    Re: Proof that DDD is correctly emulated    |
|    01 Aug 25 18:38:02    |
      XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic       From: polcott333@gmail.com              On 8/1/2025 6:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote:       > On 8/1/25 6:54 PM, olcott wrote:>>       >> ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ simulated by embedded_H determines the       >> behavior that *THE ACTUAL INPUT* to embedded_H       >> specifies. Ĥ ⟨Ĥ⟩ is not and cannot possibly be       >> *AN ACTUAL INPUT* to embedded_H so its differing       >> behavior *DOES NOT COUNT*.       >>       >       > NO!!!!       >       > By that standard, any input could mean anything becuase the machine it       > is being given can do whatever it wants with it.       >              Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.∞       Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn       (a) Ĥ copies its input ⟨Ĥ⟩       (b) Ĥ invokes embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩       (c) embedded_H simulates ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩              Yes if you ignore that I said that Ĥ.embedded_H       is based on a UTM and ignore the above is the       definition of machine Ĥ that could be true.              > But then, that IS how you consider logic to work, so it makes sense that       > is what you would think.       >       > The *DEFINITION* of the "behavior of this input", for a halting decider,       > is the behavior of the machine that input represent.       >              "Represents" is a vague weasel word that has been       used historically. "Specifies" is what has always       been meant.              > Anything else is just an admission of lying, as the problem statement is       > to decide on the behavior of the machine that input represents.       >       > Sorry, you just admitted you are just a blantant liar that doesn't       > respect definitions, and thus NOTHING you say should be considered usable.       I don't worship textbook authors as infallible Gods.       Even definitions can be proved wrong when they are       proved to contradict other definitions.              --       Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius       hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca