Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten

Am Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:37:29 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/13/2024 6:31 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/13/24 12:06 AM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 10:49 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 11:26 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 10:08 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 10:48 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 9:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 10:25 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 9:16 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 9:50 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/12/2024 8:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/12/24 9:27 PM, olcott wrote:

The input to H(D,D) does not provide the means for H to determine the
behavior of D(D).

Oh, sure it does. All the info is right there! Just add simulation!
You do know how that works, right?

I keep asking you to show all of the steps of how H(D,D) determines the
behavior of D(D) from its input and you dodge because you know that I am
correct.

You are correct: your H does not determine the behaviour of D(D).
Why does it arbitrarily decide to halt instead of continuing the
simulation?

H(D,D) is not told about the behavior of D(D) and you cannot show
otherwise with any sequence of steps of correct reasoning.

H is told about D and can simulate what it does. That's why we're looking
for a machine that finds that out for every machine.

--
joes