XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, sci.logic   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/24/2025 9:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   > On 12/24/25 9:48 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 12/24/2025 6:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>> On 12/23/25 11:44 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>> On 12/23/2025 10:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>> On 12/23/25 11:02 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 12/23/2025 9:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 12/23/25 10:44 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 12/23/2025 9:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 12/23/25 9:23 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2025 7:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/25 7:08 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2025 11:48 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/25 12:24 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2025 10:59 AM, Richard Damon wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/25 11:43 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2025 9:34 AM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A Turing-machine decider is a Turing machine D that   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> computes a total function D : Σ∗ → {Accept,Reject},   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where Σ∗ is the set of all finite strings over the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input alphabet. That is:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Totality: For every finite string input w ∈ Σ∗,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D halts and outputs either Accept or Reject.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Decision basis: Each input string is evaluated   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> according to one of two types of properties:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    (a) Syntactic property: a property of the input   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    string itself, such as containing a particular   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    substring or satisfying a structural pattern.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    (b) Semantic property: a property of the sequence of   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    computational steps explicitly encoded by the input   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    string, i.e., the behavior that the input itself   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    specifies when interpreted as a machine description.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Semantic property: This only applies to the subset   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of finite strings that are valid machine descriptions   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a property of the sequence of computational steps   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> encoded by the input string, i.e., the behavior that the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input itself specifies.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, so why does that not apply to the encoding you   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gave it to describe P?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If that input DOESN't encode the needed steps, you didn't   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> give it the right encoding.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The common meaning of the term "describe" does   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not mean specifies an exactly sequence of steps.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> But the term-of-art does.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Because is does not directly say that it specifies   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> an exact sequence of steps: experts in the field   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> of the theory of computation totally miss the very   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> subtle nuance THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> No, that is the meaning of describe as the term-of-art.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> It needs to be a complete description of the algorithm used   
   >>>>>>>>>>> by the machine, and that DOES describe, when combined with   
   >>>>>>>>>>> the input to that machine, the exact sequence of steps the   
   >>>>>>>>>>> machine will do.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Did you not claim that the x86 instructions of a program are   
   >>>>>>>>>>> a suitable encoding for the input?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess you don't understand how word meaning works.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) Semantic property: This only applies to the subset   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of finite strings that are valid machine descriptions   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a property of the sequence of computational steps explicitly   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> encoded by the input string, i.e., the behavior that the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> input itself specifies.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every tiny nuance of meaning of every single word   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is required.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Right, which EXPLICITLY says that the behavior of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> machine encoded (which is another term for describing) is a   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> valid criteria that a decider must be able to be asked.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> All you are doing is showing your utter stupidity.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> It defines P simulated by H as the correct answer.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Nope, where does it say that?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> It says the computational steps encoded in the input string.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> That would be the UTM processing of the string.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Maybe you fundamentally cannot pay very close   
   >>>>>>>>>> attention. On the other hand   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Individuals with Asperger syndrome often   
   >>>>>>>>>> exhibit exceptional focus and persistence   
   >>>>>>>>>> when pursuing their interests or tasks.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Which has not been renamed to a kind of   
   >>>>>>>>>> attention deficit by the morons in charge.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> I have hyper focused attention you have lack of   
   >>>>>>>>>> sufficient attention.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> No, you are just ignoring the fact that you have been showen to   
   >>>>>>>>> be wrong, and not figuring out how to respond, just fall back   
   >>>>>>>>> to your normal proceedure of ignoring your error and repeating   
   >>>>>>>>> your false claim.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> The key solution for this (if one exists) is for   
   >>>>>>>>>> you to read this over and over again until you   
   >>>>>>>>>> can directly see that nothing like the idea of   
   >>>>>>>>>> a UTM or direct execution is ever mentioned or   
   >>>>>>>>>> implied.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> A Turing-machine decider is a Turing machine D that   
   >>>>>>>>>> computes a total function D :  Σ∗ → {Accept,Reject},   
   >>>>>>>>>> where Σ∗ is the set of all finite strings over the   
   >>>>>>>>>> input alphabet. That is:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> 1. Totality: For every finite string input w ∈ Σ∗,   
   >>>>>>>>>> D halts and outputs either Accept or Reject.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> 2. Decision basis: Each input string is evaluated   
   >>>>>>>>>> according to one of two types of properties:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> (a) Syntactic property: a property of the input   
   >>>>>>>>>> string itself, such as containing a particular   
   >>>>>>>>>> substring or satisfying a structural pattern.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)