Sujet : Re: Pathological self-reference changes the semantics of the same finite string.
De : F.Zwarts (at) *nospam* HetNet.nl (Fred. Zwarts)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 31. Aug 2024, 16:24:38
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vavcjn$11uqn$3@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Op 31.aug.2024 om 14:26 schreef olcott:
On 8/30/2024 8:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-08-30 12:57:49 +0000, olcott said:
>
On 8/30/2024 3:11 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-08-29 17:53:44 +0000, olcott said:
>
I just proved that the basic notion of finite strings
having unique meanings independently of their context
is incorrect.
>
The context is the halting problem.
>
The behavior of
the directly executed DDD and executed HHH
is different from the behavior of
the emulated DDD and the emulated HHH
>
The correct behaviour is the computation that the user wants to
ask about. If the input string specifies a different behaviour
then the input string is worng, not the behaviour.
>
int sum(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
And in the exact same way Bill wants to get the
sum of 5+6 from sum(3,2).
HHH must use its actual input as its basis
and it not allowed to use anything else.
HHH is given a finite string of a halting program.
But olcott wants it to process a modified input, where the abort code has been removed.
That is not allowed. HHH should process its input, not a non-input.
Just as sum(3,2) is not allowed to modify the 3 into a 4 before it adds the two numbers. But olcott seems to think that it is correct to write sum as
int sum(int x, int y) { return (x+1) + y; }
DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics of the x86
language cannot possibly stop running unless aborted and
cannot possibly reach its only final halt state no matter
what HHH does.
Exactly, showing that this is an incorrect simulation, no matter what HHH does.
> Therefore DDD never halts even if everyone> in the universe including myself disagrees.
No. This proves that HHH is unable to see the halting behaviour of DDD and makes a wild guess. An incorrect guess in this case.
No matter how much olcott wants it to be correct, or how many times olcott repeats that it is correct, it does not change the fact that such a simulation is incorrect, because it is unable to reach the end of a halting program.
…