Sujet : Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 31. May 2024, 10:30:16
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <v3c1qo$25d0v$1@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
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2024-05-31 01:54:52 +0000, olcott said:
On 5/30/2024 8:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/30/24 9:31 AM, olcott wrote:
On 5/30/2024 2:40 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-30 01:15:21 +0000, olcott said:
x <is> a finite string Turing machine description that SPECIFIES behavior. The term: "representing" is inaccurate.
No, x is a description of the Turing machine that specifies the behaviour
that H is required to report.
That is what I said.
Note, the string doesn't DIRECTLY specify behavior, but only indirectly as a description/representation of the Turing Mach
The string directly SPECIFIES behavior to a UTM or to
any TM based on a UTM.
An UTM interpretes the string as a specification of behaviour
and another Turing machine may interprete likewise. But in a
different context the interpretation is different.
Note that there are specifications of behaviour that do not
describe. A specification can be an algorithm that takes
the input and output of a Turing machine and from then computes
whether the output is correct. That kind of specification cannot
be used as an input to an UTM or other Turing machine that expects
a description.
-- Mikko
…