Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 11/9/2024 7:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Right, the UNBOUNDED EMULATION, not the results of a different DDD that called an HHH that did an unbounded emulation.On 11/9/24 8:28 PM, olcott wrote:You said that the bounded HHHOn 11/9/2024 6:19 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/9/24 6:43 PM, olcott wrote:>On 11/9/2024 2:56 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/9/24 3:01 PM, olcott wrote:>
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.
>
>>>>>
I am saying that HHH does need to do the infinite emulation itself, but
Right and it doesn't.
But doesn't give the required answer, which is based on something doing it.
>
The unaborted emulation of DDD by HHH DOES NOT HALT.
*Maybe I have to dumb it down some more*
But that isn't the HHH that you are talking about.
>
It seems, you don't understand that in a given evaluation, HHH and DDD are FIXED PROGRAM.
>>>
HHH predicts what would happen if no HHH ever aborted
its emulation of DDD. This specific DDD never halts
even if it stops running due to out-of-memory error.
>
In other words, it tries to predict what some OTHER version of the program DDD would do if it was based on some OTHER version of HHH,
*Yes just like you agreed that it should*
>
On 11/3/2024 12:20 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> 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.
>
Nope, never said it could immulate some OTHER input, or predict what some OTHER program does.
>
> must CORRECTLY determine what an unbounded
> emulation of that input would do,
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.