Re: Halt Deciders must be computable functions --- dbush was always wrong

On 3/24/25 10:49 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/24/2025 6:23 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/23/25 8:59 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/23/2025 7:01 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 23 Mar 2025 15:08:25 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>

The behavior of a directly executing Turing Machine cannot be computed
because a directly executing Turing machine cannot be the input to any
computable function.

Lol. This is such a ridiculously silly objection. Of course a TM is
nothing but a finite string (or can be encoded as such). TMs are
most definitely computable - UTMs are possible.
>

>
It is enormously more nuanced than that.
https://www.liarparadox.org/Linz_Proof.pdf
>
Ĥ.q0 ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.UTM ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⟨Ĥ⟩ ⊢* Ĥ.qn

>
Incorrect, UTM was never there;, so you are just showing that your logic was a lie.
>

>
When we define the Peter Linz Ĥ with a UTM
that simulates a finite number of "moves"
before transitioning to Ĥ.qn then Ĥ reaches
Ĥ.qn and the simulated ⟨Ĥ⟩ cannot possibly
reach ⟨Ĥ.qn⟩.
>

>
Which is impossible, as such a thing is not a UTM.
>

 Saying that a UTM that simulates a finite number of states
is not a UTM is like saying that a red car is not a car.

Nope. Just shows you don't understand the meaning of the term.
Is a dead-man switch a dead-man?
Is a street legal car that you have modified by taking out the headlights still street legal?
No, definintion matter, and changing something might make it no longer qualify as what it originally was.

 

You are just showing that your logic is based on the presumption of the impossible and lies to fill the holes.

 It is not impossible for a UTM to simulate a finite number of states.

No, but it only does that if it reaches the final state.

 

>
Sorry, you are just burying your reputation in the lake of fire.

 Credibility has always been horse shit a fake measure of correctness.
If it wasn't for credibility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Two_Dogmas_of_Empiricism would have been rejected as nonsense long ago.
Goofy Quine thought there was a cycle in a tree structure.
 The term Bachelor(X) is assigned the meaning of
(~Married(X) & Male(X) & Adult(X))
 

In other words, you admit you don't understand the meaning of the words you are using and throwing up a smoke screen.
Look up the DEFINITION of a UTM and tell me how a machine that only simulates part of its input meets that definition.
I'll give you a start, a simple definition of a UTM is a machine that can replicate the full behavior of any other Turing Machine, given a suitable description of that machine.
Note, Turing Machine Theory never talks about machines ever stopping on their own except at a final state, and thus a UTM, to be a UTM, also never stops before it reaches that final state, or it didn't fulfill the definition.