Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 4/30/2024 5:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 4/30/24 11:50 AM, olcott wrote:
Since the notion of abnormal termination could not exist prior to my
creation of a simulating halt decider and does exist within this
frame-of-reference we must construe abnormal termination as not
halting. If we don't do this we end up with actual infinite loops
that halt.
Except that Turing Machine do not have a concept of "Abnormal
Termination",
They do now, otherwise simulating termination analyzers are defined
to report that infinite loops always halt because they abort their
simulation of this infinite loop to report not halting.
Any simulated input that does not need to be aborted to prevent
its own infinite execution is an input that terminates normally.
This counts as halting.
All inputs that must be aborted terminate abnormally, thus does
not count as halting.
you are just showing that your system isn't actually the
equivlent to the Turing Problem.
yes, we can define that some "final states" are to be considered
"abnormal terminations" and some "Normal Termination", but that
doesn't change the nature of the problem.
*The step that corrects the error of the halting problem comes last*
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.