Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 11/4/24 8:32 PM, olcott wrote:That is what I have been saying all along.On 11/4/2024 6:21 PM, Richard Damon wrote:And where is the contradiction?On 11/4/24 7:48 AM, olcott wrote:>On 11/4/2024 6:07 AM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/3/24 11:03 PM, olcott wrote:>On 11/3/2024 9:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/3/24 10:19 PM, olcott wrote:>On 11/3/2024 7:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/3/24 8:38 PM, olcott wrote:>On 11/3/2024 7:26 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/3/24 8:21 PM, olcott wrote:>>>
What would an unbounded emulation do?
>
Keep on emulating for an unbounded number of steps.
>
Something you don't seem to understand as part of the requirements.
>
Non-Halting isn't just did reach a final state in some finite number of steps, but that it will NEVER reach a final state even if you process an unbounded number of steps.
Would an unbounded emulation of DDD by HHH halt?
Not a valid question, as your HHH does not do an unbounded emulation, but aborts after a defined time.
>
*Now you are contradicting yourself*
YOU JUST SAID THAT HHH NEED NOT DO AN UNBOUNDED
EMULATION TO PREDICT WHAT AN UNBOUNDED EMULATION WOULD DO.
Right. it doesn't NEED to do the operation, just report what an unbounded emulation would do.
>
You asked about an "unbounded emulation of DDD by HHH" but that isn't possible, as HHH doesn't do that.
>
On 11/3/2024 12:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/3/24 9:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>
>> The finite string input to HHH specifies that HHH
>> MUST EMULATE ITSELF emulating DDD.
>
> Right, and it must CORRECTLY determine what an unbounded
> emulation of that input would do, even if its own programming
> only lets it emulate a part of that.
>
>
*You JUST said that HHH does not need to do an unbounded emulation*
*You JUST said that HHH does not need to do an unbounded emulation*
*You JUST said that HHH does not need to do an unbounded emulation*
*You JUST said that HHH does not need to do an unbounded emulation*
>
Right, it doesn't need to DO the unbounded emulatiohn just figure out what it would do.
>
Just like we can compute:
>
1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + ... + 1/2^n + ...
>
Ether by adding the infinite number of terms, or we can notice something about it to say it will sum, in the infinite limit, to 2.
>
>
In the same way, if HHH can see something in its simulation that tells it THIS this program can NEVER halt, it can report it.
>
Anyone with sufficient technical competence can see that
the unbounded emulation of DDD emulated by HHH can never halt.
No, because the HHH that is given doesn't do that, and that is the only one that matters.
>
On 11/3/2024 12:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 11/3/24 9:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>
>> The finite string input to HHH specifies that HHH
>> MUST EMULATE ITSELF emulating DDD.
>
> Right, and it must CORRECTLY determine what an unbounded
> emulation of that input would do, even if its own programming
> only lets it emulate a part of that.
>
>
If you are going to keep contradicting yourself
I am going to stop looking at anything you say.
HHH doesn't need to do the unlimited emulation, just say what the unlimited emulation by the unlimited emulator (which WILL be a different program) will do.
No contradiciton in that, unlike your claim that HHH can do a partial emulation to predict what it itself would do when it does a complete emulation of the exact same input using the exact same code.I have never said that.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.