Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 11/21/2024 3:11 PM, joes wrote:Then there is something wrong with your theory of computation, as one essental part of the normal theory is that all copies of the same program, need to behave identically when given the same input.Am Thu, 21 Nov 2024 09:19:03 -0600 schrieb olcott:In your case you may simply not even understand whatOn 11/20/2024 10:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 11/20/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:On 11/20/2024 5:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 11/20/24 5:03 PM, olcott wrote:On 11/20/2024 3:53 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-11-20 03:23:12 +0000, olcott said:On 11/19/2024 4:12 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-11-18 20:42:02 +0000, olcott said:On 11/18/2024 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:The "the mapping" on the subject line is not correct. The
subject line does not specify which mapping and there is no
larger context that could specify that. Therefore it should be
"a mapping".
On 2024-11-17 18:36:17 +0000, olcott said:Like all of them, it is unable to simulate DDD to its undeniable haltingMy code is one example of the infinite set of every possible HHH that
emulates DDD according to the semantics of the x86 language.
state.
>
infinite recursion is, thus cannot see the isomorphism.
IT IS NOT THE SAME INSTANCE OF DDD.Whatever. DDD halts and HHH should return that.But it gets the wrong answer for the halting problem, as DDD dpes halt.DDD emulated by HHH does not halt.
HHH is reporting on the behavior of its INPUT.
HHH is not reporting on the behavior of some other
different DDD instance that behaves differently.
I can make a "decider" this way: it simulates no steps at all and returnsThat may be the correct Scientologist to be.
that all inputs halt when simulated by it.
>Are you a fake Christian?I am a fake Scientologist.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.