Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Am Sat, 01 Jun 2024 10:51:18 -0500 schrieb olcott:I think Olcott thinks for some reason that DD(DD) is not the input to HH(DD,DD). Probably based on some ridiculous pedantry, like the fact a Turing machine is not a finite string.On 6/1/2024 10:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Which just happens to be the same as its input. So the containingOp 01.jun.2024 om 17:17 schreef olcott:>On 6/1/2024 3:57 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Halting criteria are the same for all functions. If the directOp 01.jun.2024 om 01:57 schreef olcott:>On 5/31/2024 6:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 5/31/24 6:54 PM, olcott wrote:On 5/31/2024 5:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 5/31/24 6:08 PM, olcott wrote:On 5/31/2024 4:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 5/31/24 10:10 AM, olcott wrote:On 5/31/2024 6:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:On 5/30/24 11:27 PM, olcott wrote:
execution of HH(DD,DD) proves that HH halts, then the direct execution
of DD also proves that DD halts.
*HH is required to report on the behavior that its input specifies* HH
is not allowed to report on the behavior of DD(DD) {the computation that
itself is contained within}.
computations is just not allowed to occur?
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.