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 58,771 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Richard Damon    |
|    Re: Turing-machine deciders a precise de    |
|    24 Dec 25 08:48:05    |
   
   [continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>>>> So, it seems you can't point out where I aaid something wrong,   
   >>>>>>> just repeated the statement which I showed you what it means.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Maybe formal correctness is too overwhelming.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Yes, it seems to have overwhelmed you.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> You didn't respond to my explanation, so I guess you are just   
   >>>>> admitting that you removed my CORRECT description and agree to it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> (1) Turing machine deciders: Transform finite string   
   >>>>>> inputs by finite string transformation rules into   
   >>>>>> {Accept, Reject} values.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> (2) Any required value that cannot be derived by applying   
   >>>>>> finite string transformation rules to finite string inputs   
   >>>>>> is outside of the scope of computation.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> And since the halting behavior of the encoded P was derived by such   
   >>>>> a transformation, it was correct and you ADMIT you have LIED.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Transform finite string   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>>   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>>   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>> inputs   
   >>>>   
   >>>> by finite string transformation rules into   
   >>>> {Accept, Reject} values.   
   >>>   
   >>> Right, which I showed, but apparently due to your ignorance, you   
   >>> can't understand.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> P simulated by H derives recursive simulation   
   >   
   > But only finitely, for this H, then it halts.   
   >   
      
   (1) Turing machine deciders: Transform finite string   
   inputs by finite string transformation rules into   
   {Accept, Reject} values   
      
   P simulated by H cannot possibly reach its own   
   final halt state Dumbo.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott
|
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca