Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders

On 5/30/2024 1:50 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 30.mei.2024 om 19:00 schreef olcott:

On 5/30/2024 10:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 30.mei.2024 om 16:43 schreef olcott:

On 5/28/2024 11:16 AM, olcott wrote:

>
When Ĥ is applied to ⟨Ĥ⟩
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qy ∞
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* embedded_H ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn
>
*Formalizing the Linz Proof structure*
∃H  ∈ Turing_Machines
∀x  ∈ Turing_Machines_Descriptions
∀y  ∈ Finite_Strings
such that H(x,y) = Halts(x,y)
>

>
A decider computes the mapping from finite string inputs to
its own accept or reject state.
>
A decider does not and cannot compute the mapping from
Turing_Machine inputs to its own accept or reject state.
>
Halts(x,y) would report on the direct execution of x(y) thus ignores
the pathological behavior of x correctly simulated by pure function H.
This makes Halts(x,y) an incorrect measure of the correctness of H(x,y).

>
Why are you referring to the 'pathological behavior of x' if your claim is that the simulator does not even reach the part of DD (below) that contradicts the result of HH? This 'pathological behavior of x' is completely irrelevant.

>
It is totally relevant because it is the reason why D correctly
simulated by H cannot possibly halt.

 Incorrect. Your own words are that lines 04, 05 and 06 are nor reachable for the simulator.

Because D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation
because D calls H(D,D) in recursive simulation D cannot possibly reach
past its own line 03.
You must must 100% complete attention to the exact words that I exactly say.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer