Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Am Tue, 18 Jun 2024 13:16:42 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 6/18/2024 12:57 PM, joes wrote:No counterargument?Am Tue, 18 Jun 2024 12:25:44 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 6/18/2024 12:06 PM, joes wrote:So H0 returns "doesn't halt" to DDD, which then stops running, so H0
void DDD()
{
H0(DDD);
}
DDD correctly simulated by any H0 cannot possibly halt.DDD halts iff H0 halts.
should have returned "halts".
"Looping" means returning to the same combined state of TM+tape.Different people define these terms differently and that gets stuck inSome TM's loop and thus never stop running, this is classicalSome TMs do not loop and do not halt.
non-halting behavior. UTM's simulate Turing machine descriptions.
This is the same thing as an interpreter interpreting the source-code
of a program.
the infinite loop of the meaning of words.
Halting means arriving at an internal state marked final (no successors).
Yes everyone does that thinking that their unsupported proclamationA UTM can be adapted so that it only simulates a fixed number ofYes. We also cannot say that that input was simulated correctly.
iterations of an input that loops. When this UTM stops simulating this
Turing machine description we cannot correctly say that this looping
input halted.
proves itself until I ask them:
Exactly which step was simulated incorrectly?
Then they clam up and use double-talk and change the subject.
Fuck you. The simulation must be complete. The steps that follow andYes I forgot that another part of this double-talk, clamming
weren't simulated at all were "simulated incorrectly".
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.