Re: A computable function that reports on the behavior of its actual self is not allowed

On 5/13/24 6:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/13/2024 4:50 PM, immibis wrote:

On 13/05/24 15:39, olcott wrote:

On 5/13/2024 4:34 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 12.mei.2024 om 21:27 schreef olcott:

Computable functions are the basic objects of study in computability
theory. Computable functions are the formalized analogue of the
intuitive notion of algorithms, in the sense that a function is
computable if there exists an algorithm that can do the job of the
function, i.e. given an input of the function domain it can return the
corresponding output. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
>
A computable function that reports on the behavior of its actual
self (or reports on the behavior of its caller) is not allowed.

>
So, olcott uses his authority to create a new problem. Why would anybody be interested in such limitation?
>

>
The definition of computable function is an axiomatic basis
not any mere authority.
>

There's no axiom that says computable functions aren't allowed to have themselves as input.

 If you are 100% precise with the meaning of your words you
already know that no executed embedded_H can possibly report
on its own behavior because no TM can take another TM as input.

Which shows tha that your just totally don't understand what you are talking about.
By your reasoning, NO decider can be asked about ANY behavior of a Turing Machine, because we can't give it on.

 If you are very sloppy here you will think that an executing
Turing Machine is exactly the same thing as a finite string
Turing machine description.

They aren't "The same thing" but it can be the needed representation of it.

 Rebuttals that are sloppy with the meaning of words allow
incorrect rebuttals to seem plausible to people that are
hardly paying attention.
 

Says the man that doesn't know the meaning of most the words he uses.