Re: How Partial Simulations correctly determine non-halting ---Mike Terry Error

Am Wed, 05 Jun 2024 07:45:39 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/5/2024 4:32 AM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 04 Jun 2024 17:16:48 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/4/2024 4:26 PM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 04 Jun 2024 13:02:03 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/4/2024 11:58 AM, Mike Terry wrote:

On 04/06/2024 11:52, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 04.jun.2024 om 12:29 schreef Fred. Zwarts:

Op 03.jun.2024 om 23:24 schreef olcott:

On 6/3/2024 3:09 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 03.jun.2024 om 14:20 schreef olcott:

On 6/3/2024 4:42 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>
writes:

You don't seem to know the first thing about simulators, in that they
can never abort.

I am apparently the sole inventor of a simulating halt decider.
A simulator correctly simulates and typically does not halt when its
input does not halt. A halt decider must always halt. When we combine
these two terms together then we get a simulator that always halts.

What is the correct behaviour on a nonterminating input?

<Professor Sipser agreed>
</Professor Sipser agreed>

You should ask him if a simulator is allowed to abort a nonterminating
input.

So why can't reach past line 4 if H halts and returns from infinite
recursion?

Anyone with sufficient expertise in the semantics of either C or x86
language or both already knows why and everyone else does not have the
required prerequisite knowledge to understand why.

Ad hominem. What happens after H halts?

--
joes