XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic, sci.math
From: polcott333@gmail.com
On 10/23/2025 6:55 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2025-10-23, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/23/2025 5:40 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 10/23/2025 6:08 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/22/2025 6:01 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-10-22, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/22/2025 3:20 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-10-22, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 10/22/2025 2:52 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-22, André G Isaak wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-10-22 12:40, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> But that entire bundle is one fixed case DD, with a single
>>>>>>>>>>> behavior,
>>>>>>>>>>> which is a property of DD, which is a finite string.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think part of the problem here is that Olcott doesn't grasp
>>>>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>>>>> "finite string input" DD *must* include as a substring the entire
>>>>>>>>>> description of HHH.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, he doesn't get that it doesn't literally have to be
>>>>>>>>> HHH,
>>>>>>>>> but the same algorithm: a workalike.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The HHH analyzing DD's halting could be in C, while the HHH
>>>>>>>>> called by DD could be in Python.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> DD does call HHH(DD) in recursive simulation
>>>>>>>> and you try to get away with lying about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm saying that's not a requirement in the halting problem.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DD does not have to use that implementation of HHH; it can have
>>>>>>> its own clean-room implementation and it can be in any language.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But nonetheless, yes, there will still be a nested simulation tower.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I made sure to read what you said all the way through
>>>>>> this time. DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>>>>> reach its own final halt state no matter what HHH does.
>>>>>
>>>>> The /simulation/ of DD by HHH will not /reproduce/ the halt
>>>>> state of DD, which DD undeniably /has/.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The finite string as an actual input to HHH(DD)
>>>
>>> i.e. finite string DD which is the description of machine DD and
>>> therefore is stipulated to specify all semantic properties of the
>>> described machine, including halting when executed directly.
>>>
>>>> *does not have the halting property*
>>>
>>> False, see above.>
>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping
>>>> from their finite string inputs
>>>
>>> And the finite string input DD has the halting property as show above.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping
>>>> from their finite string inputs
>>>>
>>>> Turing machine deciders only compute the mapping
>>>> from their finite string inputs
>>>>
>>>> The DD that has the halting property
>>>
>>> i.e. finite string DD which is an input to HH
>>>
>>>> is not an input
>>> False, see above.
>>
>> Correct simulation is defined as simulation
>> according to the semantics of the specification
>> language: C, x86 or TM description.
>
> Correct simulation must continue while the
> final instruction has not been reached.
>
> The correct simulation of a non-terminating machine
> never stops.
>
> The correct simulation of a terminating machine
> must reach its halt state.
>
>> The execution trace of DD correctly simulated
>> by HHH differs from the execution trace of
>> DD correctly simulated HHH1 proving that I
>> am right and you are stupid or dishonest.
>
> Someone idenfiable as an engineer, and not necessarily even
> a great one, will immediately know that if two simulations
> (of a deterministic program that has a single behavior)
> do not agree, /at most/ one of them can be called "correct".
>
Until that bother to actually pay complete attention
then they will suddenly realize that the behavior of
DD correctly simulated by HHH specifies non-terminating
recursive simulation that cannot possibly reach its
own simulated final halt state.
This is why I have to tell ChatGPT: do not assume
one damn thing work through all the actual steps
and see what you find.
> They could be both wrong, but they cannot be both right.
>
> If you think so, then obviously you must be stupid
> or dishonest.
>
--
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)
|
