Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong ---

Liste des GroupesRevenir à theory 
Sujet : Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong ---
De : F.Zwarts (at) *nospam* HetNet.nl (Fred. Zwarts)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 02. Jun 2024, 20:01:09
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v3ifhm$3f51j$14@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 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
Op 02.jun.2024 om 20:57 schreef olcott:
On 6/2/2024 1:51 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 02.jun.2024 om 20:37 schreef olcott:
On 6/2/2024 1:16 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 02.jun.2024 om 16:58 schreef olcott:
On 6/2/2024 4:36 AM, joes wrote:
Am Sat, 01 Jun 2024 17:37:28 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>
On 6/1/2024 5:30 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 5:27 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/1/2024 4:15 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 4:35 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/1/2024 3:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 12:46 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/1/2024 11:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 12:18 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/1/2024 11:08 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 11:58 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/1/2024 10:46 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/1/24 10:00 AM, olcott wrote:
>
Every DD correctly simulated by any HH of the infinite set of HH/DD
pairs that match the above template never reaches past its own
simulated line 03 in 1 to ∞ steps of correct simulation of DD by HH.
>
But since the simulation was aborted,
>
*The above never mentions anything about any simulation being aborted*
Not simulating an infinite number of steps of infinite recursion is
incorrect. You always forget this requirement: the simulation must be
complete.
>
When every possible simulation where DD is correctly simulated by HH
never reaches past its own simulated line 03 then we know for sure that
No DD correctly simulated by HH ever halts.
>
Similarly:
>
When every possible simulation where HH is correctly simulated by itself
never reaches its own return then we know for sure that no HH correctly simulated by HH ever halts.
>
>
*I am not going to keep repeating myself, I will simply give up on you*
>
HH(DD,DD) correctly detects that DD correctly simulated by HH cannot
possibly halt because HH keeps calling HH(DD,DD) in recursive
simulation.
>
Similarly HH(DD,DD) correctly detects that HH correctly simulated by HH cannot possibly halt, because HH keeps calling HH(DD,DD) in recursive
simulation.
>
 HH(DD,DD) correctly simulates DD(DD) that calls HH(DD,DD) in recursive
simulation proving that the directly executed HH(DD,DD) can correctly
reject its input as non-halting.
 MIT Professor Michael Sipser agreed this verbatim paragraph is correct
(He has neither reviewed nor agreed to anything else in this paper)
 <Professor Sipser agreed>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D until H
correctly determines that its simulated D would never stop running
unless aborted then
 H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D specifies a
non-halting sequence of configurations.
</Professor Sipser agreed>
 The above criteria provides the basis for a correct solution to the halting problem.
 
If so, it proves that HH correctly reports that HH does not halt.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
28 May 24 * D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets360olcott
29 May 24 +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets307Richard Damon
29 May 24 i`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets306olcott
29 May 24 i `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets305Richard Damon
29 May 24 i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets304olcott
29 May 24 i   +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets26Mikko
29 May 24 i   i`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets25olcott
30 May 24 i   i `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets24Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets23olcott
30 May 24 i   i   `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets22Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i    `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets21olcott
30 May 24 i   i     `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets20Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i      `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets19olcott
30 May 24 i   i       `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets18Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i        `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets17olcott
30 May 24 i   i         `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets16Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i          `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets15olcott
30 May 24 i   i           `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets14Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i            `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets13olcott
30 May 24 i   i             `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets12Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i              `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets11olcott
30 May 24 i   i               +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets4joes
30 May 24 i   i               i`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets3olcott
30 May 24 i   i               i +- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1immibis
31 May 24 i   i               i `- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
30 May 24 i   i               +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets5immibis
30 May 24 i   i               i`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets4Richard Damon
31 May 24 i   i               i `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets3Mikko
31 May 24 i   i               i  `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets2immibis
31 May 24 i   i               i   `- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Mikko
30 May 24 i   i               `- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
29 May 24 i   `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets277Richard Damon
29 May 24 i    `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets276olcott
29 May 24 i     +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets274Alan Mackenzie
29 May 24 i     i+* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets7olcott
29 May 24 i     ii+* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets5Mike Terry
29 May 24 i     iii+* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets2olcott
30 May 24 i     iiii`- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
29 May 24 i     iii`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets2olcott
30 May 24 i     iii `- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     ii`- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
29 May 24 i     i`* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets266Ben Bacarisse
29 May 24 i     i `* Two dozen people were simply wrong265olcott
29 May 24 i     i  +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong4Alan Mackenzie
29 May 24 i     i  i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong3olcott
29 May 24 i     i  i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong2Python
29 May 24 i     i  i  `- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong1olcott
30 May 24 i     i  +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong (including Olcott)233Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise232olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise230Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise229olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise228Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i  `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise227olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i   `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise226Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i    `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise225olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise15Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i+* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise2olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     ii`- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise1Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise12olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise11Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i  `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise10olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i   +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise5Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i   i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise4olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i   i `* Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise3Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i   i  `* Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise2olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i     i   i   `- Re: Olcott was simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise1Richard Damon
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i   `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise4joes
30 May 24 i     i  i i     i    +- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise1olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i     i    `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise2Mikko
31 May 24 i     i  i i     i     `- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- Mike Terry1olcott
30 May 24 i     i  i i     `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise209Mikko
30 May 24 i     i  i i      `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise208olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise205Richard Damon
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise204olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise195Richard Damon
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise194olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise193Richard Damon
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i  `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise192olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i   `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise191Richard Damon
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i    `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise190olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i     `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise189Richard Damon
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i      `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down188olcott
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i i       `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down187Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i        `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down186olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i         `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down185Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i          `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down184olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down182Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down181olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down111Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down110olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down108Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down107olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down105Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down104olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down103Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i  `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down102olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down92Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down91olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down13Fred. Zwarts
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i i`* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down12olcott
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down11Fred. Zwarts
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down74Richard Damon
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i +- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down1immibis
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down2joes
2 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i i   `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down9Mikko
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i i `- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down1immibis
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i i `- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down1Fred. Zwarts
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down50Wasell
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i +* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down16Fred. Zwarts
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down3joes
1 Jun 24 i     i  i i       i i           `- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise --- pinned down1immibis
31 May 24 i     i  i i       i `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise8Mikko
31 May 24 i     i  i i       `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong --- Try to prove otherwise2Mikko
30 May 24 i     i  i `- Re: H is an incorrect x86 emulator1immibis
30 May 24 i     i  +- Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong1immibis
1 Jun 24 i     i  `* Re: Two dozen people were simply wrong26Mikko
30 May 24 i     `- Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets1Richard Damon
30 May 24 +* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets --- deciders38olcott
31 May 24 `* Re: D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly halt --- templates and infinite sets14Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal