Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is INCorrectly rejected as non-halting V2

On 7/13/24 6:47 PM, olcott wrote:

On 7/13/2024 5:40 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 09:31:33 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/13/2024 9:21 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:34:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/13/2024 8:24 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:04:01 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/13/2024 7:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 13.jul.2024 om 13:39 schreef olcott:

On 7/13/2024 3:15 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 13.jul.2024 om 01:19 schreef olcott:

On 7/12/2024 5:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 7/12/24 10:56 AM, olcott wrote:

>

As soon as the decider correctly determines that itself would never
halt unless is aborts the simulation of its input the decider is
required to abort this simulation.

Which decider is aborting here, the simulated or the outer one?
A decider always halts, so it cannot find itself non-halting.

The executed decider is always correct to abort the simulation of any
damn thing that would cause itself to never halt.

Which is definitely not itself. Simulating a decider is guaranteed to
halt. Same as a simulator that aborts.

It cannot abort the simulation of itself because itself is not
simulated.

It certainly is, because the DDD that it simulates calls HHH.
>

 You are thinking of its twin brother.
 

Then so is the DDD, and you are forgetting that all copies of a determinstic program act the same.
Something you have implicitly agreed to byu refusing to show how it could differ.