Sujet : Re: How to write a self-referencial TM?
De : news.dead.person.stones (at) *nospam* darjeeling.plus.com (Mike Terry)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 16. May 2025, 03:26:28
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <10067ok$3ib39$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2
On 16/05/2025 02:47, wij wrote:
On Fri, 2025-05-16 at 01:40 +0100, Mike Terry wrote:
On 15/05/2025 19:49, wij wrote:
On Thu, 2025-05-15 at 17:08 +0100, Mike Terry wrote:
On 14/05/2025 18:53, wij wrote:
On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 12:24 -0500, olcott wrote:
On 5/14/2025 11:43 AM, wij wrote:
On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 09:51 -0500, olcott wrote:
On 5/14/2025 12:13 AM, wij wrote:
Q: Write a turing machine that performs D function (which calls itself):
>
void D() {
D();
}
>
Easy?
>
>
>
That is not a TM.
>
It is a C program that exists. Therefore, there must be a equivalent TM.
>
To make a TM that references itself the closest
thing is a UTM that simulates its own TM source-code.
>
How does a UTM simulate its own TM source-code?
>
>
You run a UTM that has its own source-code on its tape.
>
What is exactly the source-code on its tape?
>
>
Every UTM has some scheme which can be applied to a (TM & input tape) that is to be simulated.
The
scheme says how to turn the (TM + input tape) into a string of symbols that represent that
computation.
>
So to answer your question, the "source-code on its tape" is the result of applying the UTM's
particular scheme to the combination (UTM, input tape) that is to be simulated.
>
If you're looking for the exact string symbols, obviously you would need to specify the exact
UTM
being used, because every UTM will have a different answer to your question.
>
>
Mike.
>
People used to say UTM can simulate all TM. I was questing such a UTM.
Because you said "Every UTM ...", so what is the source of such UTM?
>
Yes, a UTM can simulate any TM including itself. (Nothing magical changes when a UTM simulates
itself, as opposed to some other TM.)
Supposed UTM exists, and denoted as U(X), X denotes the tape contents of the
encoding of a TM. And, U(X) should function the same like X.
Given instance U(U(f)), it should function like f from the above definition.
But, U(U(f)) would fall into a 'self-reference' trap.
There is no self-reference trap.
In your notation:
- f represents some computation.
- U(f) represents U being run with f on its tape.
Note this is itself a computation, distinct from f of course
but having the same behaviour.
- U(U(f)) represents U simulating the previous computation.
There is no reason U(f) cannot be simulated by U. U will have no knowledge that it is "simulating itself", and will just simulate what it is given.
Mike.
| Date | Sujet | # | | Auteur |
| 21 May 26 | … | | | |
Haut de la page
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.
NewsPortal