XPost: comp.theory, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   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.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> (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.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The decider outputs Accept if the corresponding property   
   >>>> holds for the input and Reject otherwise.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> 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   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)