Sujet : Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 -- Ben agrees that Sipser approved criteria is met
De : noreply (at) *nospam* example.com (joes)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 28. Jun 2024, 18:21:20
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <v5mnu0$1d3t3$1@i2pn2.org>
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 : Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2)
Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:21:15 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 6/28/2024 4:25 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-27 17:38:12 +0000, olcott said:
On 6/27/2024 12:25 PM, joes wrote:
Am Thu, 27 Jun 2024 11:56:56 -0500 schrieb olcott:
You are wrong. The input is the variable in the question. The question
is not a part of the input.
The input is the machine address of the finite string of x86 machine
code.
And in that input there is no question about whether itself halts.
That is in the programming of the analyser.
The input is a specific finite string of bytes that has the semantics
of the x86 programming language.
For a decider that is made for that sort of input. But there cannot be
any question in that input.
The question is:
Does this finite string of machine code specify behavior that terminates
normally?
And the question is not: Do I, the analyser, give the correct answer?
It has no power to declare itself the authority.
None-the-less no-one here understands that every halt decider is
only required to report on the behavior that its actual input
actually maps to.
What do you even mean? Of course it follows its programming and does not
spontaneously generate an answer. It may not be possible to write such
a program: then there is indeed no machine that can compute it, but the
input still has a defined halting status
Instead everyone here expects that the halt decider must map to the
English description of what the authors of textbooks expect it to
map to.
That is the definition of a halt decider. If it does not fit that
definition, it is not one.
Some definitions ARE incorrect.
That definition is not incorrect.
When I define Snitfinbangflizzledroop as the square-root of
misconceptions about the US constitution my definition is incorrect
because there is no mapping from the input of misconceptions about the
US constitution to any square-root value.
There is an obvious mapping from D to its behaviour: run it, or give it
to any simulator /that it does not call/.
…