Sujet : Re: Liar detector: Fred, Richard, Joes and Alan --- Ben's agreement
De : mikko.levanto (at) *nospam* iki.fi (Mikko)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 16. Jul 2024, 08:58:12
Autres entêtes
Organisation : -
Message-ID : <v755m4$15kf6$1@dont-email.me>
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
User-Agent : Unison/2.2
On 2024-07-15 12:55:21 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/15/2024 2:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-14 14:15:45 +0000, olcott said:
*You can comprehend this is a truism or fail to*
*comprehend it disagreement is necessarily incorrect*
Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non
termination of HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
No, it is false. What the input specifies is a property of the input alone.
Whether some HHH is able to process it without looping forever is not a
property of the input and not relevant to the meaning of the input.
In other words you believe that you can correctly
ignore the verified fact that DDD correctly emulated
by HHH does call HHH(DDD) in recursive emulation.
It is not a fact and not verified but otherwise, yes, that is not relevant.
-- Mikko
…