Sujet : Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten
De : acm (at) *nospam* muc.de (Alan Mackenzie)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicSuivi-à : comp.theoryDate : 13. Jun 2024, 16:35:15
Autres entêtes
Organisation : muc.de e.V.
Message-ID : <v4f033$260h$1@news.muc.de>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
User-Agent : tin/2.6.3-20231224 ("Banff") (FreeBSD/14.0-RELEASE-p5 (amd64))
[ Followup-To: set ]
In comp.theory olcott <
polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/13/2024 3:49 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 12 Jun 2024 18:25:14 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 6/12/2024 6:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 6/12/24 12:57 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/12/2024 6:33 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
[ .... ]
As I pointed out, there ARE finite-string transformations that do it,
that is a UTM.
Why, because the claim isn't about the simulate by H, but the behavior
of the difectly executed D(D), or its simulation by a UTM.
H(D,D) must compute the mapping from its finite string input
transforming [it] into the behavior that it
specifies using finite string transformation rules.
*H DOES NOT simply guess what you think it should do and do that*
It has a *specification* it must fulfill.
The specification is only in your own mind ....
The specification is "calculate whether a particular program with a
particular input halts".
.... and cannot be encoded as a program/input pair.
Indeed, not. It's good to see you finally accepting the Halting Therem.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
-- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
…